Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Categories

Dark Dreams of Furiae - a new module for NWN:EE! Buy now
Attention, new and old users! Please read the new rules of conduct for the forums, and we hope you enjoy your stay!

Baldur's Gate III released into Early Access

1110111113115116120

Comments

  • SjerrieSjerrie Member Posts: 1,204


    So, Ed Greenwood is saying there that a video game (supposedly, BG3) has a lot of Myrkul-related plot details. Potentially, it can mean other Dead Three are also involved in the BG3 story, Bhaal included. It can become that "missing" connection to the classic games.

    Interesting, I admit, but what role in the classic games did Bane and Myrkul play again? Besides the sporadic mention in relation to Bhaal..?

  • DinoDinDinoDin Member Posts: 1,326
    If you dug deep into the prophecy they were part of the backstory, I don't actually remember the details. But several of the readable tomes mentioned their relationship to Bhaal and what he did before your character was born.

    From my perspective, this was always predictable. I always felt that some strong tie-in to the original saga would be irresistible for Larian's writers.

  • SjerrieSjerrie Member Posts: 1,204
    edited November 2020
    DinoDin wrote: »
    If you dug deep into the prophecy they were part of the backstory, I don't actually remember the details. But several of the readable tomes mentioned their relationship to Bhaal and what he did before your character was born.

    From my perspective, this was always predictable. I always felt that some strong tie-in to the original saga would be irresistible for Larian's writers.

    Bane and Myrkul were mentioned in a few tomes, sure. The subject matter of those tomes is *Realms* lore however, not *game* lore, and those are not necessarily the same. Both deities are completely inconsequential in the classic games, and so I wouldn't consider their inclusion in BG3 a connection necessarily.

    Edit: did a quick StringRef search, Myrkul is mentioned in exactly 2 tomes in the classic games, another 2 times in dialogue, and once in a minor item description.

    deltagoThacoBellkanisatha
  • DinoDinDinoDin Member Posts: 1,326
    edited November 2020
    Sjerrie wrote: »
    DinoDin wrote: »
    If you dug deep into the prophecy they were part of the backstory, I don't actually remember the details. But several of the readable tomes mentioned their relationship to Bhaal and what he did before your character was born.

    From my perspective, this was always predictable. I always felt that some strong tie-in to the original saga would be irresistible for Larian's writers.

    Bane and Myrkul were mentioned in a few tomes, sure. The subject matter of those tomes is *Realms* lore however, not *game* lore, and those are not necessarily the same. Both deities are completely inconsequential in the classic games, and so I wouldn't consider their inclusion in BG3 a connection necessarily.

    Edit: did a quick StringRef search, Myrkul is mentioned in exactly 2 tomes in the classic games, another 2 times in dialogue, and once in a minor item description.

    Just gonna drop this here, but it's not mere Realms lore. It's lore highly salient for the main plot of the series: https://forgottenrealms.fandom.com/wiki/Dead_Three

    TLDR is Bane and Myrkul were the catalysts for why Bhaal (and others) take a mortal form in the first place.

  • SjerrieSjerrie Member Posts: 1,204
    DinoDin wrote: »
    Sjerrie wrote: »
    DinoDin wrote: »
    If you dug deep into the prophecy they were part of the backstory, I don't actually remember the details. But several of the readable tomes mentioned their relationship to Bhaal and what he did before your character was born.

    From my perspective, this was always predictable. I always felt that some strong tie-in to the original saga would be irresistible for Larian's writers.

    Bane and Myrkul were mentioned in a few tomes, sure. The subject matter of those tomes is *Realms* lore however, not *game* lore, and those are not necessarily the same. Both deities are completely inconsequential in the classic games, and so I wouldn't consider their inclusion in BG3 a connection necessarily.

    Edit: did a quick StringRef search, Myrkul is mentioned in exactly 2 tomes in the classic games, another 2 times in dialogue, and once in a minor item description.

    Just gonna drop this here, but it's not mere Realms lore. It's lore highly salient for the main plot of the series: https://forgottenrealms.fandom.com/wiki/Dead_Three

    TLDR is Bane and Myrkul were the catalysts for why Bhaal (and others) take a mortal form in the first place.

    Respectfully, the reason why Bhaal had to take mortal form is indeed Realms lore, but also completely irrelevant to how the GAME plays out.

    Bhaal knew he'd die so he crafted a contingency plan. That plan is the focus of the game. How he would die and who would be responsible for it has no bearing on said plan.

    ThacoBellkanisathaelminster
  • DinoDinDinoDin Member Posts: 1,326
    edited November 2020
    I dunno what you're arguing here. It's true that a player doesn't have to know anything about Myrkul/Bane to grasp the basic story line and thus stakes of the original games. However, they're *the most relevant events* in the entire realms that precede Bhaal's actions as a mortal being. It's not just realms lore. Dunno why you're being obstinate about this.

  • deltagodeltago Member Posts: 7,774
    Myrkul, Bane and even Bhaal were part of the setting during the first two games, they were not connected to the plot in any significant manner until ToB, and then only for Bhaal.

    ThacoBellSjerriekanisatha
  • ThacoBellThacoBell Member Posts: 12,009
    ", Ed Greenwood is saying there that a video game (supposedly, BG3) has a lot of Myrkul-related plot details. Potentially, it can mean other Dead Three are also involved in the BG3 story, Bhaal included. It can become that "missing" connection to the classic games."

    So the major connection is going to be how 5e completely invalidated the struggle and one of the central plots of the original games? Greeeeeeaaaaaaaaat....

    kanisatha
  • BallpointManBallpointMan Member Posts: 1,564
    I thought this was relatively commonly known - that the Dead Three had a cult of some sort, and the players were going to interface with it during the game. I suppose we didnt (and still dont) know just how meaningful that will be.

    On the face of it, it always made the argument that there was no connection to BG1 or 2 seem wrong. We know it's in Baldur's gate. We know it's a continuation to Descent into Avernus, which was a continuation of Murder in Baldur's Gate - which was related to BG 1 and 2. The connection is clearly there. I hope they spin it off and focus on either Bane or Myrkul. No need to use Bhaal again. Let that sit as a backdrop, and perhaps a new trilogy can focus on the other parts of the dead three (or just another one of the Dead Three).

    SjerrieDinoDinmodestvolta
  • SjerrieSjerrie Member Posts: 1,204
    DinoDin wrote: »
    I dunno what you're arguing here. It's true that a player doesn't have to know anything about Myrkul/Bane to grasp the basic story line and thus stakes of the original games. However, they're *the most relevant events* in the entire realms that precede Bhaal's actions as a mortal being. It's not just realms lore. Dunno why you're being obstinate about this.

    The only point I am trying to make is that maybe in our desire to connect BG3 to the classic games (and thus legitimize it as a successor) some of us are grasping at straws and mistaking the basic lore of the Forgotten Realms for a direct meaningful connection.

    kanisathaThacoBell
  • FlashburnFlashburn Member Posts: 1,830
    Myrkul, eh? Spirit Eater cameo when?

  • PsicoVicPsicoVic Member Posts: 752
    edited November 2020
    Flashburn wrote: »
    Myrkul, eh? Spirit Eater cameo when?

    I hope so. Of all the lore connections to be found in the game they never talked about some references to the events of the lore of FR that are connected to the Neverwinter games. I mean, they do not have to, but that would be interesting.
    Sjerrie wrote: »
    DinoDin wrote: »
    I dunno what you're arguing here. It's true that a player doesn't have to know anything about Myrkul/Bane to grasp the basic story line and thus stakes of the original games. However, they're *the most relevant events* in the entire realms that precede Bhaal's actions as a mortal being. It's not just realms lore. Dunno why you're being obstinate about this.

    The only point I am trying to make is that maybe in our desire to connect BG3 to the classic games (and thus legitimize it as a successor) some of us are grasping at straws and mistaking the basic lore of the Forgotten Realms for a direct meaningful connection.

    XD There´s more than one discussion in the sub-forum of BG3 and in the "general discussions" topic, it´s not all about "successor" this, the successor that, "deserves the name or not", and some such.
    Sometimes talking about connections is just talking about possible connections with the lore, no strings attached, nor making a case for another unrelated topic of discussion.

  • TressetTresset Member, Moderator Posts: 8,161
    edited November 2020
    deltago wrote: »
    Myrkul, Bane and even Bhaal were part of the setting during the first two games, they were not connected to the plot in any significant manner until ToB, and then only for Bhaal.

    ?!

    Uhhhhhhhhhh........................................ I am not sure what to even say to this...

    After a moment of thought, I found something to say that I think sums it up pretty well:

    hmvs9zxmncxl.png

    Post edited by Tresset on
    JuliusBorisovArvia
  • deltagodeltago Member Posts: 7,774
    Tresset wrote: »
    deltago wrote: »
    Myrkul, Bane and even Bhaal were part of the setting during the first two games, they were not connected to the plot in any significant manner until ToB, and then only for Bhaal.

    ?!

    Uhhhhhhhhhh........................................ I am not sure what to even say to this...

    After a moment of thought, I found something to say that I think sums it up pretty well:

    hmvs9zxmncxl.png

    Ah yes. A picture of the logo of the game which is Bhaal’s Holy Symbol totally got me with that. Completely explains how Myrkul was part of the games plot for the first two games and why he is the ‘missing connection to the third’

    ThacoBellSjerrie
  • TressetTresset Member, Moderator Posts: 8,161
    edited November 2020
    deltago wrote: »
    Myrkul, Bane and even Bhaal were part of the setting during the first two games, they were not connected to the plot in any significant manner until ToB, and then only for Bhaal.

    I can easily see how Bane and Myrkul have little to do with the plot of BG1 and BG2, but to say that Bhaal had nothing significant to do with the series until ToB is like saying the New Testament of the Holy Bible has nothing to do with God because it is only about some guy called Jesus.

    ArviaBallpointMan
  • JuliusBorisovJuliusBorisov Member, Administrator, Moderator, Developer Posts: 21,700
    I never said Myrkul was involved into the original plot. This is what I said.

    So, Ed Greenwood is saying there that a video game (supposedly, BG3) has a lot of Myrkul-related plot details. Potentially, it can mean other Dead Three are also involved in the BG3 story, Bhaal included. It can become that "missing" connection to the classic games.

    If it's not enough for you, ok, wait for the game and find out. But from what I've played and read, I think Bhaal and the Bhaalspawn will be involved into the BG3 plot.

  • deltagodeltago Member Posts: 7,774
    Tresset wrote: »
    deltago wrote: »
    Myrkul, Bane and even Bhaal were part of the setting during the first two games, they were not connected to the plot in any significant manner until ToB, and then only for Bhaal.

    I can easily see how Bane and Myrkul have little to do with the plot of BG1 and BG2, but to say that Bhaal had nothing significant to do with the series until ToB is like saying the New Testament of the Holy Bible has nothing to do with God because it is only about some guy called Jesus.

    Plot of BG1: Gorion’s Ward life is in danger, so they Candlekeep where they are ambushed and Gorion is killed. Alone in the wilderness, the ward seeks help from fellow travellers which brings them to Nashkel to investigate the iron shortage that is plaguing the region. After solving the issue at the mine, the party discovers that the bandits plaguing the region are more tied to the shortage and are working together with those providing the shortage. As more of the plot is discovered, all signs point to the Iron Throne as those behind the issues. Behind the Iron Throne is an ambitious, power hungry individual who has misinterpreted the Alaundo prophecy and thinks causing a war with Amn will allow him to ascend into Godhood. Gorion’s Ward, who turns out to be this person’s half brother, exposes the Iron Throne and those behind it thwarting their plans and eventually defeating his half brother.

    Bhaal not mentioned once. Yes both Gorion’s Ward and Saravok are Bhaalspawn, but that is character development, not plot. It’s like saying this is a story is all about the Harpers because there are 4 of them (all playing significant roles) in the game.

    And the Dead Three were known to be part of Baldur’s Gate 3 since the first teaser trailer.

    ThacoBell
  • JuliusBorisovJuliusBorisov Member, Administrator, Moderator, Developer Posts: 21,700
    edited November 2020
    I don't agree with that, sorry. BG1 plot: Sarevok finds out he's the child of Bhaal and wants to kill other children of Bhaal to resurrect his father. He tries to attack you, the child of Bhaal. It starts from the open cinematics and ends in the finish cinematics about the statues of bhaalspawn in the old Bhaal temple. All the Iron Throne business is just a background for Sarevok's actions, aimed to start a big war with a lot of bloodsheds to resurrect Bhaal.

    The key item in the game: Gorion's letter. The key area in the game: the old temple of Bhaal.

    This idea is developed in SoD with the priestess of Bhaal, the temple and Sarevok's researches.

    BG2 plot: Irenicus wants your soul because you're the child of Bhaal. Bhaal (your soul) speaks to you during many dreams.

    TressetBallpointManArviaMirandel
  • TressetTresset Member, Moderator Posts: 8,161
    edited November 2020
    deltago wrote: »
    Tresset wrote: »
    deltago wrote: »
    Myrkul, Bane and even Bhaal were part of the setting during the first two games, they were not connected to the plot in any significant manner until ToB, and then only for Bhaal.

    I can easily see how Bane and Myrkul have little to do with the plot of BG1 and BG2, but to say that Bhaal had nothing significant to do with the series until ToB is like saying the New Testament of the Holy Bible has nothing to do with God because it is only about some guy called Jesus.

    Plot of BG1: Gorion’s Ward life is in danger, so they Candlekeep where they are ambushed and Gorion is killed. Alone in the wilderness, the ward seeks help from fellow travellers which brings them to Nashkel to investigate the iron shortage that is plaguing the region. After solving the issue at the mine, the party discovers that the bandits plaguing the region are more tied to the shortage and are working together with those providing the shortage. As more of the plot is discovered, all signs point to the Iron Throne as those behind the issues. Behind the Iron Throne is an ambitious, power hungry individual who has misinterpreted the Alaundo prophecy and thinks causing a war with Amn will allow him to ascend into Godhood. Gorion’s Ward, who turns out to be this person’s half brother, exposes the Iron Throne and those behind it thwarting their plans and eventually defeating his half brother.

    Bhaal not mentioned once. Yes both Gorion’s Ward and Saravok are Bhaalspawn, but that is character development, not plot. It’s like saying this is a story is all about the Harpers because there are 4 of them (all playing significant roles) in the game.

    And the Dead Three were known to be part of Baldur’s Gate 3 since the first teaser trailer.

    Ah, yes. Clearly the haunting dreams and other constant hints of the legacy of Bhaal and especially scrl2j are not a part of the game. I must be delusional. Forgive me.

  • JuliusBorisovJuliusBorisov Member, Administrator, Moderator, Developer Posts: 21,700
    edited November 2020
    I think @deltago mixes the plot and the story.

    https://www.writers-online.co.uk/how-to-write/creative-writing/plot-vs-story-do-you-know-the-difference-between-story-and-plot/#:~:text=Let's consider plot vs story,of events inside a story.

    Story is the timeline: the sequence of events in your narrative. The point of a plot is to support a story: to make a story come to life. The basic ‘story’ question is ‘what happens next?’ Plot is what happens: the sequence of events inside a story. The basic question we ask about a plot is why? Why does this event happen?

    Here’s the fundamental difference as defined by a great writer – EM Forster, the author of A Room With A View. He puts it succinctly: plot is ‘a narrative of events, with the emphasis on causality… The king died and then the queen died is a story. The king died and the queen died of grief’ is a plot.’



    So all the Iron Throne is a story. But Bhaal is the plot. This is why the game (even BG1) uses the Bhaal symbol in its icon. This is why Sarevok says "You will go first". This is why the first paragraph you hear in BG2 is about the child of Bhaal who has awaken.

    Tressetbyrne20Arvia
  • ThacoBellThacoBell Member Posts: 12,009
    I thought this was relatively commonly known - that the Dead Three had a cult of some sort, and the players were going to interface with it during the game. I suppose we didnt (and still dont) know just how meaningful that will be.

    On the face of it, it always made the argument that there was no connection to BG1 or 2 seem wrong. We know it's in Baldur's gate. We know it's a continuation to Descent into Avernus, which was a continuation of Murder in Baldur's Gate - which was related to BG 1 and 2. The connection is clearly there. I hope they spin it off and focus on either Bane or Myrkul. No need to use Bhaal again. Let that sit as a backdrop, and perhaps a new trilogy can focus on the other parts of the dead three (or just another one of the Dead Three).

    All this shows is that BG3 is a sequel to the P&P modules. The modules related to BG1 and 2 in a manner similar to the novels. Its shares some proper nouns and a setting, with no regard for the actual characters or themes.

    BG3 is a sequel to SPIN OFF MATERIAL.

  • JuliusBorisovJuliusBorisov Member, Administrator, Moderator, Developer Posts: 21,700
    ThacoBell wrote: »
    BG3 is a sequel to SPIN OFF MATERIAL.

    Unless you get:

    - Bhaalspawn story influence
    - Minsc back
    - other references, such as Faldorn-worshipping druids
    - more, as directly hinted by Swen, but sorry, not revealed 'til the full game releases

    But sure, your mind is set.

    PsicoVicbyrne20
  • JuliusBorisovJuliusBorisov Member, Administrator, Moderator, Developer Posts: 21,700
    edited November 2020
    While I see what you're saying about Minsc, but maybe you should give writers a chance? Maybe he won't be shoehorned into the story and will become a natural part of BG3? Maybe dialogues with him will feel smooth?

    I understand he was present in a few other D&D games, but that alone doesn't mean he will be a bad character in BG3.

    And for that, we first need to get there ourselves and try in the game. Yes, it's a concern he might be a "hamster joke" material. But he might not be as well.

    Minsc and Dynaheir were a highlight of Siege of Dragonspear for me. Their texts and VO felt very spot on. Why can't he be written alright by another writer? Just give it a chance.

    Post edited by JuliusBorisov on
  • BallpointManBallpointMan Member Posts: 1,564
    edited November 2020
    ThacoBell wrote: »
    I thought this was relatively commonly known - that the Dead Three had a cult of some sort, and the players were going to interface with it during the game. I suppose we didnt (and still dont) know just how meaningful that will be.

    On the face of it, it always made the argument that there was no connection to BG1 or 2 seem wrong. We know it's in Baldur's gate. We know it's a continuation to Descent into Avernus, which was a continuation of Murder in Baldur's Gate - which was related to BG 1 and 2. The connection is clearly there. I hope they spin it off and focus on either Bane or Myrkul. No need to use Bhaal again. Let that sit as a backdrop, and perhaps a new trilogy can focus on the other parts of the dead three (or just another one of the Dead Three).

    All this shows is that BG3 is a sequel to the P&P modules. The modules related to BG1 and 2 in a manner similar to the novels. Its shares some proper nouns and a setting, with no regard for the actual characters or themes.

    BG3 is a sequel to SPIN OFF MATERIAL.

    It's still a sequel, and still has connections to the original trilogy. For reasons we have discussed in here literally dozens of times, there is no perfect definition of a "sequel". Harping on this point over and over again is boring.

    The other thing discussed ad nauseum in this thread/forum is the difference between "plot" and "setting". This particular version of it just looks a lot like an attempt to disagree over semantics.

    WotC has said there is a connection. Larian has said there is a connection. The only two entities who are fully able to decide if there is a connection have spoken. People dont have to like that connection, but to dismiss it when the only authorities on the subject have spoken doesnt make much sense to me.

    JuliusBorisovbyrne20ArviaDinoDin
  • deltagodeltago Member Posts: 7,774
    I’m dropping this again. It’s pointless. Anyone here can grasp at whatever straws they want to grasp at to feel better about this game being called Baldur’s Gate 3. I don’t care.

    Do not tag me to this thread again.

    ThacoBell
  • PsicoVicPsicoVic Member Posts: 752
    As far as I know, the point of a forum is to find and discuss different opinions, more so in a general thread. if you are not comfortable with it I hope you find a resonance chamber suitable to your taste.

  • byrne20byrne20 Member Posts: 499
    ThacoBell wrote: »
    BG3 is a sequel to SPIN OFF MATERIAL.

    Unless you get:

    - Bhaalspawn story influence
    - Minsc back
    - other references, such as Faldorn-worshipping druids
    - more, as directly hinted by Swen, but sorry, not revealed 'til the full game releases

    But sure, your mind is set.

    Exactly this. Couldn’t agree more 👍🏻

    JuliusBorisov
  • SjerrieSjerrie Member Posts: 1,204
    Side question: why do people keep referring to the original games as a trilogy? Siege of Dragonspear was an expansion to BG1(EE) and Throne of Bhaal was an expansion to BG2...

    BallpointMankanisatha
Sign In or Register to comment.