Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - Story & Character Discussion Please Larian, Rewrite or Delete [ACT 3 SPOILERS] (very long with spoilers)

I... don't read every single post here unfortunately. So I apologize that I couldn't care less.

That argument I was made is to state that people has different perception of what a character should be.

You think Aerie is not childish whinny girl and Jaheira is not self-righteous, that is valid - what I was saying is that Aerie being childish etc is *also* valid.

I hope this is not too complex to understand.


You humor me 10th, you will humor me 11th and so on.

So, which one is the same with the one we got in BG3? None of them, also *all* of them.

You seems to be very disturbed by this changes, all I can offer is patting you in the back for this dark time you are having.




I take it that you agree that it's all comes down too "I don't like the writing"? (Since it actually is, regardless of the moot arguments you are having with other member of the forum, which opinions also moot, and yes, also mine is moot!).

I think the Season 8 GoT was fine. If it was up to me, I'd make Robert Baratheon sailing over the Island where Danny was in Season 1 and chop her head twice.

But you see, this is an ideal world, *my* ideal world. But I don't live in it. I live in a world where the series ends with Dany become a Hitleress.




I am beginning to think this thread will become self-help thread to help people cope with the adjustment syndrome they're having since the lore changes finally hit them hard with the new game..

Perhaps, though it's also likely the thread will be eclipsed by yet another thread on the same subject within a few weeks/months, perhaps one with Viconia or Sarevok in the title so peeps know what the conversation is really about before clicking into it? Lol

What also happens is that it becomes particularly hard to follow longer threads, since it's common for people to break into separate direct conversations or sorta talk past one another. The second person frame is tough on forums too when it's used in disagreements I mean. Someone types the word "You" and it instantly invites argumentation and puts peeps on their heels. That then becomes similar to watching an argument or a car crash unfold in public. Like it's interesting for a while and everyone rubbernecks, but it's also short lived, until the next car crash draws the attention.

These boards also lack passive engagement features, which many have grown accustomed too these days, so when those don't exist it also prompts more repetition and re-duplication. I think Larian could, for example, enable upvotes (while keeping downvotes disabled) and it would immediately smooth out their boards traffic into something much more manageable and more pleasant and insightful to read generally. Those are asides though, and have to do with the way this spot is structured.

The article I linked on the previous page will get lost in the shuffle I'm sure. It has already spawned a dozen other articles and as many reddit threads heheh.

The reason it's topical is because the Characters we ended up getting in BG3 are mostly Ohlen's renditions. Like that's almost certainly who Larian is defering to here, not some WotC canon committee hehe. Whether they succeeded in harmonizing, that's harder to say. These takes on the Characters are coming from his more recent supplementals and sourcebooks, and later TT campaigns, remembrances of earlier TT campaigns etc. more than the characters as they presented in BG1/BG2. Even though the author is definitely The Author, it's a bit like expanded universe/legends stuff in my view. I have great respect for Ohlen, for innovating these characters, but I still prefer my own sacred cows based on the games/characters we got in the actual cRPGs, when they actually first released, to spectacular acclaim and near universal love!

"Heroes of Baldur's Gate (5e)" is ok for what it is, sure. It's also a 55 dollar Table Top print-to-order tome in hardcover, or a 20 pdf, which is a little steep, though it does have nice artwork and some interesting character sketches. He surely has some Authority on this score, and for interpreting or re-interpreting the draft sketches, privileging origin, but it's not enough for me when compared to the characters in the actual games. You know the characters as I experienced them originally, which are different. Those are still the characters I hold dear and the one's I'd wish to revisit here, if they're going to be kicking around still hehe.

Ps. What's particularly wild here, given the parallels/analogy to SW, is that this is also the Kotor dude! And of course I love Kotor! You can almost imagine how it happens, like a bunch of old timers call each other on the phone (cause that's how it used to be done hehe) and they say ok let's do it again, with some more characters from the big binder and even more deets. I'm fine with that generally, I like directors' cuts and VH1 behind the musics, as much as anyone, but then you get into issues of provenance and who really authored a collective work vs the reception the completed work received in it's particular moment. It works somewhat better when there is a shift in medium, so - the novelization/comic book/animated series or video game, tie ins - 'based' on the movie. When the medium is the same (in this case cRPG to cRPG sequel) the spotlight burns brighter and much hotter. We fixate on everything there and make fewer allowances for liberties taken, even when the person at the helm has all the bone fides. It's just scrutinized in a more exacting way. Also, now we have a whole vocabulary to describe this stuff, the 'Requel' or 'soft reboot' all that diction, cause we've seen it play out elsewhere.

How much obeisance is shown to the thing that actually blockbusted vs the notebooks that it came from? Fraught issues to be sure, but it's like one can definitely chart some of these courses in advance and see how it's played out with other similarly popular art-works and popular characters over the years. Thoughtful omission only works when something is actually omitted. Having once gone there, and including the thing, the dynamic changes. Like painting over a famous painting 20 years later, or re-recording an old song (but also misplacing the master and pulling it from the radio) where no-one can get at it anymore, the first thing that got the big first response and the broader cultural impact. I think I can sorta see where it goes, I just miss Viconia! I think she could have been a great companion in BG3! heheh

It's odd, because otherwise Jaheria and Minsc seem very true to form

Couldn't agree more. Better to not touch a good character than to ruin it, and to produce this mangled garbage with S and V, Larian obviously doesn't want to bother to make them justice. So let's just remove them and replace them with whatever else that doesn't tie with BG.

All I can say is, Larian is still a far cry from the Bioware of old, either by the innate abilities of the writers, or because time has changed since BG 1 and 2. There is a reason why the old RPGs from pre-2012 Bioware are still beloved to this day.

I'm still not at all convinced that Larian really did anything at the 'fans request' that they weren't going to do already anyway hehe.

Minthara made waves because she was in that initial cutscene and they kept changing her hair around patch to patch in EA lol. People probably would have made similar noise if they'd changed Nadira's appearance ya know. Karlach is still conspicuously absent in all the banner art, with Mizora in her spot for the Struzan style poster stuff.

I don't see these characters being heavily iterated in response to EA feedback, since frankly, everything in the EA development process seems like it took about 10 times longer than any of us really imagined. Some of that datamined material for other planned companions or origins seems like it's from way early on. The Narrator was already the narrator by the time EA started, right so any self narration recorded in the past tense was probably scrapped early on.

Disappointment with where they landed seems to come in two contrasting favors, like it's either "just listen to what the players are telling you they want" = keep noodling, or "don't listen to what the players say they want" at the risk compromising intent or going lowest common denominator for everything. I think EA was more the later than the former honestly. Most things didn't get a big change from what they showed off initially 3 years ago. I feel like the lead time on some of this characterization was probably like a full year, or even 18 months, or more, so I somehow doubt player Feedback was the culprit on this one. Like anything else they held back for full release that didn't get run through the pressure cooker.

I think they could course correct for their Collector's Edition whatever, and maybe still hit some marks. I think the doppelganger thing would work well for a mod that just does the hard cut, but it's harder for me to imagine them doing that for the game as released. For that stuff, I think they have to add material, since walking it back after the fact is almost impossible. You don't get a second chance at the first impression, but you can get for the second third and fourth impression, but that means more paths.

Having the characters included but sans recruitment into the party, means there is nothing to the character outside the story as presented. When the character joins the party as a companion, this changes, and you get other ways in on it. I think that's why Jaheira works here, since her callback flavor once she's in the party just gives more opportunities for happy recall. They should have done the same for Viconia in my view, so the contrast in approaches wouldn't seem so stark.

Well, this thread just killed all motivation I had to finish BG3 - and especially any desire I had to do Shart's romance. Or even take her with me at all, anymore. Between the Halsin issues, the issues Shart has because of Halsin's issues, and how their writer also handled Red Prince's romance back in DOS2... now, we add character assassination of what, in my opinion, is one of the most well-written and complex characters in RPGs?

Baldur's Gate 3 really does get worse the more time passes. I don't even know if a Definitive Edition could fix these problems, anymore.

Thank you OP for the thread, regardless, though it leaves perhaps the most bitter taste of all in my mouth thus far regarding BG3's copious issues. I think after I do an Emperor run, I'll just... leave it alone, at least until DE - and only if DE manages to fix even half of these problems, which I feel is a big ask at this point.

It was brought up earlier but there's a fair amount of reason to believe it's not "character assassination" but rather following step with WOTC and a book they wrote called "Minsc and Boo's Journal of Villainy". It's unclear whether WOTC gave Larian notes to follow or if WOTC liked what Larian was writing, but this is what WOTC canonized. Sarevok canonically turns back to evil in the greater WOTC lore, and while there's plenty of argument to be had about Viconia's different values between games, Shar is the exact goddess that would be most likely to manipulate Viconia to be who she is in BG3 and the book doesn't make a statement on it either way except that she carries out Shar's orders faithfully.

Trying to claim it isn't character assassination, in the same breath as saying "following in step with WOTC", is a bit humorous. Not in a good way, but humorous all the same.


I consider BG1 and BG2 to be the canon story. Any awful and widely-mocked trash WOTC tried to release after the fact, is not what most people who didn't read or even know about it would consider "canon". They would consider the overall events of the past games as the canon, and thus BG3 is indeed retconning and assassinating the canon.

I could give less of a rat's backside what WOTC wants to claim is canon vs. how things were written before by the actual writers who first worked on it. WOTC hasn't exactly given me, or anyone, a reason to extend that courtesy and good will towards them. They're an awful company.

There have been a lot of what feel like, kind of reductive commentary towards people who have played BG1 and 2 quite often for many years, and find this treatment of Viconia (and Sarevok, to a lesser degree) horrid, in this thread - and, with all respect to folks, I don't really plan to get into long discussions over it. Agree to disagree, but as someone who has cited Viconia as probably one of my favorite characters in D&D-related media, learning about all this is incredibly depressing and, quite frankly, kind of infuriating. Like with Halsin's.... everything, I'm glad to learn about it early on before experiencing the full brunt of these feelings myself unexpectedly, but it still doesn't make it sit any better, unfortunately.

edit: Ah, there's the reductive commentary. Yes, it quite is a waste of time trying to speak to people who want to treat other's dissatisfaction as somehow not worth respecting or even trying to understand. Talk down to them and make passive aggressive remarks, instead. That'll show 'em!

Don't get me wrong, WOTC is absolutely an awful company as most corporations usually are. But the writers and designers generally aren't the reason for that. I can see saying anything else is gonna be a complete waste of time so, uh... best of luck to you finding DnD continuity bridging 20 year content design gaps and full century timeline gaps you like.

I'm surprised they didn't just say Viconia had her memories messed with by Shar or something. I dunno, feels like an easy way to still use her as a baddie but let people keep the head canon that she'd reformed

Yeah, the problem is actually that people who loved BG2 will never accept WotC's canon because every time they mess with it, it just looks like nobody at WotC never actually played the game. It's embarrassing.

Baldur's Gate 3, and all of the BG2 legacy characters that WotC so carelessly dumps on, would not even exist without BG1 and BG2. All credit for the enduring love for the Baldur's Gate series is owed to the BG2 writers, not WotC. You would think WotC, Larian, and fans would show some basic respect for the hard work and thought that went into that success. But apparently not.

...your argument was literally 'it's not character assassination because WOTC character assassinated them first!' And the continuity thing is equally bizarre as you basically said that people aren't allowed to be upset with the Star Wars sequels or other modern attempts at 'continuing' franchises like Star Trek, Lord of the Rings, Ghostbusters, etc when they retcon or make things up.

I had issues with Sarevok myself.

Viconia not so much.

First things first, Sarevok always struck me as looking more Kurd-ish than just straight up Michael Clarke Duncan. And no Kevin Richardson is GREATLY disappointing on his front.

As for his role in the story, the only way I could make it make sense is if the original Bhaalspawn took away his will(which is an option in the original ToB) and then when he was gone, Sarevok with no will of his own defaulted to being a mindless slave of his heritage.

Viconia was underwhelming, but otherwise she was fine.

You just have to assume for both of these, neither were redeemed even though that was an option in the original games.

I also learned that after 20 years, Viconia did not in fact gain a new streak of blonde hair in BG2. Imagine my surprise realizing she's actually wearing a hood. I feel especially dumb, because that directly falls in line with how she's introduced in BG2 lol

This might be off topic, but in the spirit of "Rewriting" I think making Shar basically just "EviL' just cuz is a terrible writing choice, or whatever...
When I was first playing the game and having Shar and her followers being described, it felt mostly like they were the misunderstood and outcasts for "some reason" or another, So i had it in my head they were just basically Anti-Hero/Anti-Villain-ish or along those lines. So what I'm trying to say is I'd rather Shar etc be rewritten to fit that mold more.

That would be big change to the lore. Shar is the original evil. If you ever watched Buffy she's the equivalent of the first evil. Selune wants Faerun to support life, Shar wants to see all life ended.

There are other anti hero gods - Hoar, Shevarash - but Shar? Not so much - she literally invented evil.

Well I'm not familiar with any sort of DnD Lore; but I thought that was Tiamat? I thought Shar was Darkness etc; I've heard the Editions change things up or something...

I honestly don't remember a time, when Shar wasn't really, really evil and I play DnD for a while. I'm sorry, but she was never just misunderstood. That doesn't mean, that some of her followers couldn't be redeemed - I have not much experience with Viconia, since I never liked her enough to have her in my party and make all my favourite characters leave or fight her, but apart from Shadowheart in BG3, there is also her friend in the House of Grief, who stands by her, no matter, how she decides in the end. She seems to be a pretty decent person for worshipping such an evil goddess. So the followers could potentially be outcasts and anti heroes, with a very poor choice of god(ess), but Shar is evil.

Yeah, Shar herself has always been inherently evil.

That said, she attracts the vulnerable and afflicted by teaching them to not only come to terms with, but embrace things such as loss.

Because of that her followers can be sympathetic to a degree, even if she herself isn't.

Basically Shar worship is an awful coping mechanism that some denizens of Faerun occasionally fall back on.

Hmm That sounds very boring; Wish it weren't so. But nothing I can do about that.