Originally Posted by Wormerine

Theoretically, there is nothing wrong with BG3 being what it is - not every RPG continues the story directly with every installment, not every sequel keeps the gameplay loop the same..


This would be true for actual novels/stories completely seperate from any game as well.

As I posted to someone else in another forum: Can a new story take into account and build upon what happened there (as it has been stated by Larian it will using the 'canonically accepted' outcome version I believe) and build on the foundation that was the Bhaalspawn story 100+ years in the past? Absolutely it can, and a good story writer could probably come up with a myriad of ways of writing a sequel story for any starting chain of events that were covered in the first 2 novels that is born out of the events of what came before and the affectations it may have had, but also doesn't go back and continue or change anything to do with that closed loop. The only 'interconnecting tissue' is the label for the starting/foundational setting here, which is Baldur's Gate - and even then, BG2 itself is illegitimate by the standard many are trying to bring to bear since you never actually go back to the city itself there either.

Gameplay mechanics differential aside, the story is the central foundation, and while sure, its unlikely Larian/WotC would be going back and adding to, much less changing, what most consider to be a closed loop series of events in the smaller 'Bhaalspawn saga' storyline involving BG, there's nothing that says the greater story of events and affectations in the world coming out of that closed loop can't be built upon with further interconnecting story. We simply have to wait and see awhile after launch what the truth depth of that interconnection with the original saga actually is.

Last edited by Tyndaleon; 28/08/20 08:00 PM.
“Any fool can criticize, condemn and complain - and most fools do. But it takes character and self control to be understanding and forgiving.”---Dale Carnegie.