Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Story & Character Discussion The insane timeline of the main plot (do I even need to tell you that it's spoilers?)

Eh, I can make my peace with the new canon having Bhaal resurrected 20 years before the old canon says so. It's not a big deal. What is a big deal is that the Dead Three should only become active as a unit after the resurrection of each of its constituent parts. Bhaal was slain in 1358, so it's fine if Gorion's Ward died in 1458, 100 years after Bhaal's death.

Jergal shenanigans are always happening apparently, even though there's little documentation. That dude occupies a weird place in the divine hierarchy and possesses knowledge and abilities well beyond those of the Greater Gods.

I mean, fair enough about accepting new canon, but I don't want Jergal to become the Star Wars equivalent of the Force. I don't want to look at a plot hole or inconsistency and be like "must have been Jergal!" - it fundamentally ruins stakes in any story.

I've also edited the OP to include all the info that everyone who contributed so far brought together.

I see where you're coming from. It all depends on how Larian (and WOTC) intend to handle the Lord of the End of Everything moving forward. My forum post about him compiles some evidence that even though he is certainly helpful, and displays some level of compassion at times, he is not a good guy and is very much the mastermind to end all masterminds.

So you're saying the soul cage was crafted in 1482 because that's when the dead three returned, but do we have anything in the game that corroborates that assumption.

As for the influence of dead gods...what is dead may never die, and with strange retcons...I'm pretty sure despite being dead (Bhaal was dead in the first two games) Bhaalists and the followers of other dead gods, have had influence and power throughout the timeline.

Honest question, why are you trying to include lore from other media (books, even other games) into BG3s timeline?

It's a rule known to all D&D players: Every DM creates their own world. They might use a known setting, they might use characters or other elements from a setting, but at the end of the day they decide how the multiverse works, what Gods are / are allowed to do / how they work. How magic works (if it even exists) and the timeline are 100% up to the creator.

That said, there are definitely things to discuss about BG3s timeline in particular, but anything from any other sources (including BG1 and 2) should be ignored imo. They included elements from BG1 and 2 but in LARIANS world they can act however Larian decides and whenever Larian decides. Bhaal has become active when Larian says so, etc.

In short, the only lore that matters for BG3 is BG3 lore. Just like you don't go on about how Elminster SHOULD BE according to x source when sitting at a DMs table.

It's an excellent story with plenty of smart twists and turns, but I agree that it is overly complex. That complexity leads to a ton of inconsistencies.

The thing is, this isn't just a random game at a table. This is an officially licensed game that unless I'm mistaken, is actually now Canon to the timeline of the forgotten Realms. They are adding to the timeline that will be considered Canon going forward, so expecting it to fit with Canon already established is entirely reasonable. Even if that weren't the case, how can you suggest anything from the precious two games should be ignored? This is a direct, numbered sequel to those games, so while reveals and retcons are certainly acceptable, saying they should or can be ignored is not how sequels work. That would be like if the second Indianna Jones movie started and he was a British museum director and not an American teacher.

After reflecting on the detailed analysis, I must admit that Baldur’s Gate III seems riddled with inconsistencies, especially concerning the Dead Three's timeline and the motivations of key figures like the Emperor and Elder Brain. My initial playthrough had me engrossed, but these revelations make the plot feel surprisingly incoherent. It's disheartening that, despite the rich lore of Baldur’s Gate, these narrative gaps exist. Hopefully, future updates or expansions will clarify some of these issues.

No, not necessarily. Just because it's in an official game doesn't mean it's an official part of the timeline. You might wish that they did a better job of elucidating how their story fits into the timeline as it is, just for it to make sense. The previous two games aren't canon. They aren't even canon *within the worldbuilding of BG3.* None of the "endings" of the previous 2 games are actually compatible with the world we see in BG3.

Yeah I feel like there's a perfectly serviceable, even a pretty cool, story under the hood but it has all these needlessly convoluted details on top. Unshaven Occam ass plot.

BG2 was made Canon by WotC, even creating a canon protagonist, Abdel Adrian, and I think BG3 is, too.

Honestly when I read this post.

I feel like they just ran out of time and told some coders to scatter books all over the place to fill in some gaps. Almost all of this stuff should be shown ON SCREEN. There are some fantastic flashback scenes for Shadowheart's backstory, why is this never utilized in the main plot? To further elaborate, in 90 hours I had like maybe 5 Dark Urge story scenes, that comes down to 18 hours between each progression. And in my playthrough it was the same for the main story tbh, I feel like I have barely seen Gortash, Orin, Ketheric or the Netherbrain on screen. They need to be more present in the story. The game just seems to keep sidetracking me into sidequests that never tie into the main story.

I think the ideal rewrite would be to be able to remove the tadpole by the end of act 1 (start of act 2) and by that time we should already have gotten content that sufficiently invests us into whatever the main plot is.

Many points brought up in the OP is stuff I have also said elsewhere so no need to comment on that. But let me just point out again that this game can STILL be the genre defining game it had the potential to be.

There's a canon "Gorion's Ward", but it doesn't mean that what happened to Gorion's Ward in BG1 and BG2 is at all canon. In any of the endings of Throne of Bhaal, Bhaal is dead and gone forever. That's obviously not how things actually shake out.

Baldur's Gate isn't some "random" game, nor does ANY of the players get to be Dungeon Masters, ever. Players are, without exceptions, participants of the game and not the authors of it. Even if Baldur's Gate1, 2 and 3 exist in their own separate universe, away from anything and everything WOTC and Larian made before, Baldur's Gate still has it's own established universe, rules and plots that you can't break away from. You can't have on one end say "The Dead Three will be ressurected and unite again upon the death of the last Bhaalspawn (which is Gorion's Ward in 1482, canonically)" but then have Bhaal be active many decades before said event would occur. Here is the thing - ultimately, it doesn't change much. They could just have the entire plot delayed by 30 years and the plot would work just as well, but inconsistencies like this tend to build up over time and eventually degrade what could otherwise be a fantastic plot.

Imagine a timeline with what I just described:

1482-1512
- Gorion's Ward dies, the Dead Three are ressurected.
- The Three start rebuilding themselves, completely solo at first. Durge is created, Orin is born and the Temple of Bhaal is inhabited again.
- Balthazar, while not acting as Chosen of Myrkul, begins carrying out His most important tasks - one example being searching for a prime candidate to make Chosen.
- Bane is at a complete loss initially, until Gortash stumbles into Him.
- Contact between the Three are scarce, but slowly develops.
1512
-Gortash, now Chosen of Bane is tasked with retrieveing the Crown of Karsus.
-He meets the now Chosen of Bhaal, Durge, and the two develop their relationship.
-Later down the line, Balthazar finally finds the perfect candidate to be Chosen of Myrkul - Ketheric. Regardless if the Absolute plot was going to happen or not, but Ketheric's ascendance is a well timed convenience for the Dead Three.
-Everything else happens.
1522
-The events of Baldur's Gate 3 take place.

Nothing changes here, but now, there isn't a chronological disturbance of events that you have to retcon for in future installments. And this is just one issue of many, and as said, small issues - even if ultimately nitpicks - tend to add up and ends up ruining the immersion.

Let me ask you this: have you ever had a DM in any DnD game that you ever played who just completely ruined your immersion? They set up what is otherwise a brilliant thriller, only to make some absolutely insane blunders in the presentation of certain characters or such that ends up ruining the entire plot? It does not matter that that DnD universe is "temporary" and "custom" - your immersion was still broken, and the damage has been already dealt.

Not only is there a canon protagonist from BG 1+2, the events of the games, including expansions, were also made canon. And where the game offered choices there is either a canon choice (Thief guild instead of vampires) or the choice is not recorded.

I disagree with the sentiment that it's "convoluted" or "needlessly complex" - I actually think that the story of BG3 is quite well balanced in the amount of different setups, risks and payoffs there are, but the consistency in which it was written is what is hurting the story. Say, if Emperor would actually embrace being Balduran - that wouldn't make anything more complicated, in fact, it'd make the story much easier to consume as Balduran is a character that many within the Baldur's Gate universe know about and can relate to. If anything, him not embracing Balduran actually makes it more complicated - you start asking questions such as "Why wouldn't he assume the form of Balduran as the Dream Visitor? Why wouldn't he alert Stelmane about the presence of a dormant Mind Flayer colony under Moonrise? Why is he so inept at building trust with and understanding the motivations the BG3 gang when he can read the minds of everyone involved?" That is what creates these "needlessly complex" plots, because a lot of the holes have to be filled by the consumer instead of the writer.

I can forgive time inconsistencies but motivations have to be clear.

Agree 100%. The main plot is less relatable/accessible/comprehensible than the origin stories. Not everyone knows dnd lore or has played bg1/2.