Bit of an aside, but all this talk of faithless and the Wall and Myrkul + NWN2....I really hope that comes up in BG III at some point. The Wall was tied up in a contingency plan to keep Myrkul 'alive' in the case of his death (the other seems to have involved his Crown, though I'm not as familiar with the events surrounding that plot and Laerel Silverhand) It would be neat-almost unavoidable, I think-to address the events of that game in some form. We know how Bhaal came back, we know how Bane came back, Myrkul has yet to be addressed.
Would love to see an update on characters like Kaelyn the Dove, One-of-Many, -etc.
This discussion made me think...Does Larian even have the rights to Forgotten Realm? They have D&D system, Baldurs gate name, some of the characters (all?) Yet anything Forgotten Realm lore or history related seems super toned down or just non existent. We just have the names; towns, deities, monsters...But Larian probably can't use more detailed historical Faerun content?
I did not go though the entire EA so someone could comment on that. WOTC can be incredibly picky and isn't known to be a bastion of good will. I would as far as to say Larian made a deal with the devil. I hope everything turns out ok.
This kind of reminds of that Rings of Power mess of a show (history and lore part).
Larian may be playing fast and loose with the lore in BG III -> the stuff with drow eyes, how mithral is made, now this with the Paladins-but 5e is a notably very lore-adverse edition. I doubt WoTC care too much about the 'details' as long as Larian hits the right bullet points. Bullet points that sometimes contradict major parts of established realmslore anyways.