Larian Studios Forums Baldur's Gate III Baldur's Gate III - General What's happened (lore) since BG2?

And kender has absolutely nothing to do with halflings.

I get really peeved when people claim that idiot Abdel is the canon protagonist of Baldur's Gate 1 and 2. Even though he canonically existed in the lore, I argue that he canonically was not involved in the events of the games because in the Throne of Bhaal novel, he gave up his Bhaalspawn essence to the Solar to be a normal mortal too, so there is no way he could live to be in the Murder of Baldur's Gate tabletop adventure game. So, if he isn't the canon Bhaalspawn of the Baldur's Gate games, then who is?

That's easy. It's our player customized character. Because of the way Siege of Dragonspear ended, actually. See, Siege of Dragonspear is considered canon by Wizards of the Coast and Larian, so expect the events of that expansion to be mentioned in Baldur's Gate 3. The ending of Siege of Dragonspear had been hinted in the intro of Shadows of Amn even though Shadows of Amn came first (Beamdog wanted to tie up some loose ends), the people of Baldur's Gate figuring out that your character is a Bhaalspawn and being forced to leave Baldur's Gate on bad terms, so there is no way in the Nine Hells that the tall idiot Abdel from the Baldur's Gate novels is the canon Bhaalspawn protagonist, because the people of Baldur's Gate cannot EVER know that he is a Bhaalspawn, otherwise they would have him jailed and ready for beheading if he ever tried to return to Baldur's Gate after Throne of Bhaal. In Murder of Baldur's Gate, the game that heralds the return of Bhaal during the Second Sundering, Abdel is hailed as a hero and elected a Grand Duke! Why would they do that if they know he is a Bhaalspawn?

My point is, our player customized character and Abdel both exist. Our character's gender and race does not canonically matter in the lore because in the end, he/she becomes a fallen hero by the time the saga ends. Think about it. Our character is framed for murder of a child of a Grand Duke in the end of Siege of Dragonspear, and in Throne of Bhaal, our character is also accused of letting the fire giants decimate Saradush. Plus, the Bhaalspawn fire giant Yaga Shura knows our player character as the "Terror of the Sword Coast". After giving up godhood and having the Solar take our player character's and Imoen's portions of Bhaal's essence to Mt. Celestia, our player character develops a too negative reputation to live a peaceful life in Baldur's Gate, Amn and Tethyr, and lives a peaceful life somewhere else on Toril with their romanced companion or on their own, but Abdel would have a clean slate in his reputation, the people of Baldur's Gate could claim he is the hero who killed Sarevok and saved the city even if he was never involved. That can happen, you know. Some random guy getting the praise and fame for heroics he never did while the real hero fades into obscurity from the memories of the people and history books. All this would explain why Abdel lived for 100+ years to Murder in Baldur's Gate, because he still has his portion of Bhaal's essence in him, he never gave it up like in the Throne of Bhaal novelization.

>Dear god no. Like anything come out of Dragonlance, it is the worst of Fantasy.

so like usually when people here shittalk anyhting,t hey dont know what to talk about.
Draconians are from dragonlance as Ixal pointed out, they also explode on death.

Dragonborn in its current incarnation were first introduced in 4e and are uttelry unrelated to Draconians.

They are probably closer to klingons than they are to draconians

>Kender and halflings
yes? one of them is a normal DnD race, one is absolute cancer by design.

Idk how this should support your argument.
How about you actually read something for once?

This... actually makes a lot of sense. You're right, I think. It's a good theory, if not canon. Thank you.

Anytime. What matters is it makes sense. I honestly don't care what is canon because years ago, people used to say that the Baldur's Gate novels are canon over the games they are based on, but I noticed some glaring contradictions in the novels that seriously ruin its credibility as a canon story. For example, the first novel claims that the Iron Throne is a splinter group of the Zhentarim. That's not true in not just the Baldur's Gate game but also in the general Forgotten Realms lore, because in the 3rd Edition sourcebook "Lords of Darkness", it claims that the Iron Throne was founded by Asmodeus' granddaughter (Sfena, who is the tiefling daughter of Glasya) who needed to create a rich mercantile organization to sell off to a devil in exchange for a cure for her illness. This makes a lot of sense as to why the Iron Throne was so desperate to get rich that they started the iron crisis. Also, that corrupt Flaming Fist officer Angelo is a Grand Duke of Baldur's Gate novel. That is also seriously wrong because in sourcebooks like Volo's Guide to the Sword Coast, which details the lore of the Sword Coast a year before the events of the Baldur's Gate game, there is NO RECORD of Baldur's Gate having a Grand Duke by the name of Angelo! There was just Belt, Liia, Eltan and Entar, and there can be only four Grand Dukes.

So I'm sure you understand why canon doesn't matter to me unless the lore and story line up as seamlessly as possible.

So you're saying your previous posts and future posts are not cannon or based on cannon, thanks for the heads up.

Let me give you a heads up that doesn't give you room to jump the gun. What I actually mean is if lore from a D&D novel or game contradicts the lore told from a D&D source book, then it can't be canon, you have to do your own research to see which version corresponds with the general lore

Case in point: The Pool of Radiance novelization and Pools of Darkness novelization and Pool of Radiance: Ruins of Myth Drannor novelization are canon over the game versions they are based on, and I'll tell you why.

Pool of Radiance: First of all, the story is chronologically set in 1340 DR, 28 years after the Icewind Dale 2 game, and 28 years before Baldur's Gate 1. While neither the game or novel version of Pool of Radiance doesn't contradict anything, the novel must be canon because two of the three main characters, Shal Bal and Tarl Desenea get married and have a son who grows up to be the main character of the novel "Pools of Twilight", a completely original story set one year after Baldur's Gate 2 part 2 Throne of Bhaal and one year before Neverwinter Nights.


Pools of Darkness: This one is a doozy. The novel is canonically set 10 years after the Pool of Radiance novel and 8 years before the Time of Troubles. Although the game version is supposed to be the last game in the Pool of Radiance series released in the late 80's and early 90's, it can't be set anywhere near the year when the Time of Troubles happened because of how involved the god of tyranny, Bane, one of the Dead Three is in the story.

The game version of Pools of Darkness makes it clear in the intro that Bane had been pulling the strings of the evil forces that haunted the game version heroes in "Secret Of The Silver Blades", and player characters can be imported to these games from "Pool of Radiance". And canonically, the "Curse Of Azure Bonds" game should take place AFTER the "Azure Bonds" novel, and the "Azure Bonds" novel itself is in 1357 DR (even though it was released alongside the Pool of Radiance games), seven years after the "Pools of Darkness" novel. So since Alias the red haired swordswoman who is the main character of the Azure Bonds novel and appears in the Curse of the Azure Bonds game hasn't been artificially born yet, Tyranthraxus, the main villain of the Pool of Radiance should not know about the Azure Bond curse in 1350 DR, which is why the Pools of Darkness game version cannot be canon.


Pool of Radiance: Ruins of Myth Drannor: The novelization is more canon than the game it is based on because in the game's intro, the narrator reveals that the game (and the novel) is in the Year of the Gauntlet (1369 DR, IN THE SAME YEAR AS BALDUR'S GATE 2 SHADOWS OF AMN!), but the events of Pool of Radiance happened "NINE SUMMERS AGO", which means the game version assumes Pool of Radiance happened in the summer of 1360 DR! That can't be true because that would mean Pool of Radiance, Curse of the Azure Bonds, Secret of the Silver Blades and Pools of Darkness are all set in 1360 DR and possibly a couple years afterwards. If you don't understand why that's a big problem for the Forgotten Realms lore, remember that Bane, the god of tyranny died in the Time of Troubles (which happened in the Year of Shadows, 1358 DR), and he needs to be alive to play his vital role in Pools of Darkness game version's story, otherwise the timeline of events would be screwed up badly.


In short, here's the short timeline of the games and novels I mentioned in this post go.


Icewind Dale - 1281 DR

Icewind Dale 2 -1312 DR

Pool of Radiance (novel version) - 1340 DR

Pools of Darkness (novel version) - 1350 DR

Azure Bonds - 1357 DR

Curse of the Azure Bonds - Marpenoth (October) 1357 DR (a couple months after Azure Bonds)

Secret of the Silver Blades - 1358 DR

Baldur's Gate 1 and Siege of Dragonspear - Summer to Winter of 1368 DR

Baldur's Gate 2 Shadows of Amn - Spring of 1369 DR to 1370 DR

Pool of Radiance: Ruins of Myth Drannor (novel version) - Summer of 1369 DR

Baldur's Gate 2 Throne of Bhaal - 1370 DR

Neverwinter Nights - 1372 DR

Which books and novels? As most are not canon

Truthfully just wanted to see what you were going say. I replied a while back on one of your canon posts that the newest FR campaign guide wasn't on the list. 4e players handbook & campaign guide and never got a reply. Looked up official canon for FR and there is none.

If I remember correctly heard the only thing that mattered was how each story lined up.

So ya, you can make up whatever you want as canon.

I thought so. I can't believe I missed your reply somehow.

The truth is, to this day, Wizards of the Coast is still piecing together how every story told in FR in the form of novels, comic books and video games fit together. What they originally considered canon is not always accurate and can be tweaked. There is this one guy on YouTube who goes by the username Harbs Narbs, who posts interesting fun facts about the lore surrounding Baldur's Gate 3, and recently he did a lore video about Volothamp Geddarm, how he is in Baldur's Gate 3 even though he is human and 100+ years passed between Baldur's Gate 2 and 3. In his video he revealed that in Baldur's Gate 1, when you meet Volo in Nashkel and check his inventory, he has an aquamarine gem as his only quick item, and aquamarine gems can only be found in the northern parts of Faerun, hinting that his optional appearance in Baldur's Gate 1 is some months after he wrote "Volo's Guide to the North", a source book with lore details on Faerun a year before the story of Baldur's Gate 1. Harbs Narbs tweeted this discovery to Ed Greenwood and he liked what Harbs discovered a lot because it provided a canonical link between a game and a source book.

Let's just say Wizards of the Coast and D&D fans like us make new discoveries in the Forgotten Realms every day through every Forgotten Realms novel, comic book and game released, and what was originally canon can, and quite frequently, be retconned.

Take the main character of the Baldur's Gate novels for another example. I forgot to say in one of my recent posts in this thread that another reason why I strongly believe the Baldur's Gate game protagonist and Abdel to be different Bhaalspawn characters is not just because of how the Baldur's Gate game series canonically plays out with "Siege of Dragonspear" added into the mix, but also because of their radically different backstories.

Abdel was born sometime between 1341 and 1343 DR, and he was not rescued by Gorion. In the official novelization of Baldur's Gate 1, in the part when Abdel learns he is one of the children of Bhaal through Gorion's letter like in the game, Gorion claimed in his letter that a paladin rescued Abdel and brought him to Candlekeep where Gorion agreed to raise him. The tabletop adventure game "Murder in Baldur's Gate", which takes place a decade before "Descent Into Avernus" and "Baldur's Gate 3", has information that expands on Abdel's backstory a bit and reveals that the paladin that rescued Abdel was a member of the Hands of the Loyal Fury and his name was Sir Daesric the Pious and he rescued young Abdel from a group of Deathstalkers. In contrast to the official novel, in the game, Gorion personally rescued the game protagonist from Bhaal cultists in a secret temple of Bhaal in the Forest of Wyrms (a forest not far from Boareskyr Bridge, the spot where Bhaal died. "Siege of Dragonspear" reveals the location of where Gorion rescued the game protagonist when he/she was a baby). Gorion was also a friend and a lover of the game protagonist's mother, who happened to be a priestess of Bhaal and had to kill her to rescue the game protagonist, and Imoen, and unintentionally leave Sarevok behind. Gorion didn't personally know Abdel's mother, all he knew about her is that she died shortly after she gave birth to Abdel. Also in contrast to Abdel's birth date, the game protagonist is supposed to be born in 1347 or 1348 DR, as Baldur's Gate 1 the game claims that your character has lived in Candlekeep for nearly 20 years.

I thought this myself running through the game! We have bookshelves literally EVERYWHERE with no books to pull off and read. Its such a waste of time to even click them.

I'm not exactly bouncing up and down with glee myself but WoTC have the final say and they say Abdel was the bhaalspawn. Hopefully Larian are going to keep doing what they've done in the few bits of Baldur's Gate I/II references in BG3 and kept it very deliberately vague so players can put 'their' bhaalspawn into the background.
Hell, for giggles try imagining Tav's <CHARNAME>; they wished to put somewhere the masses wouldn't know them, and they got their wish; hundreds of years into the future.

Thankfully, as was said earlier in this thread I think, retcons means the books are no longer 100% canon, which means that we are free to ignore absolutely everything from them other than the name being Abdel Adrian.

Furthermore, I move to motion that the protagonist of BG3 from now on until eternity be called TAVNAME

Like in universe they don't, but don't dragonborn come from people wanting to play the draconians from dragonlance but in other settings?


I feel the whole fun of drizzit clones and good orc characters.. is to be outcasts? If there's a whole faction it's not as fun.
Like necromancy, you want yours to be a wizard whos breaking the rules and going to desperate lengths no matter the cost, not in a necromancer country where all the schools teach it and everyone accepts it?

No, but you're willingly eating the crap sandwich when I made my case clear as day that just because WoTC says something is canon doesn't always mean they are always 100% accurate. If you've seen how "Siege of Dragonspear" ends, you'd know there's no way that happened to Abdel, his reputation needs to be clean so he can get elected Grand Duke 100 years later.

And there is plenty of wiggle room for player's to put their Bhaalspawn protagonist into the lore alongside Abdel. If you looked at my previous post, I hinted that Gorion likely raised three Bhaalspawn in Candlekeep instead of two. Abdel being the oldest would leave Candlekeep years before BG1, leaving "our" Bhaalspawn and Imoen the only two for Gorion to look after left.

I'll never forgive them for ruining Tieflings in 4e. They have yet to recover. :p

that was later writers fault tho.
4e tieflings were specifically Nentir Vale tieflings, that all came from the same empire and had interbred a lot so they all had a uniform look.
This never was meant to apply to Forgotten Realm tieflings, but later writers got lazy and just copied the look.


Also id like to point out that Neverwinter Nights 1 and 2 very much already had the "Cute demon horns" look, long before 4e was a thing

>Like in universe they don't, but don't dragonborn come from people wanting to play the draconians from dragonlance but in other settings?

They come form people wanting to play Dragon people.
Draconians are not very popular, mostly due to exploding on deaht.

There were tons of options for draconic humanoids in 3.5, Half dragons,Dray , Dragon templates or the original Dragonborn which had this weird thing going on where a follower of bahamuth would encase himself in an egg and turn into a dragonborn.

The problem was that there were 500 different "Half dragon" races or templates and each and every one of them was either very weird or very overpowered.
Dragonborn basically simplified this to one non overpowered (and in 5e sadly underpowered) race that makes sense in most settings

Tieflings had got popular enough to be a 'proper' player race. I remember back in the 2nd edition (and planescape torment) times when you were doing a tiefling you rolled a D100 to see what you got for their eyes, horns, hair, skin, legs, tail, wings, ect.
I can understand the idea behind a unified appearence; there would be one with the art just to stop people going "What's that supposed to be?" when they see a humanoid with 2 prehensile tails, multifaced insect eyes, digitade legs and leathery wings next to your Annah or Valen or Neeshka, and it can also make things a bit easier for dungeon masters, since it gives them a bit more of a known quanitity to plan around in advance.

Which is completely different because those were video games and video games need to come with prepackaged graphics and can't account for visual diversity.

And they were still human-looking with minor oddities, not Hellboy-lookalikes.



That's a nope from me boyo, they still chose to make the "uniform visual identity" ridiculous, cartoonish, shallow and one-dimensional, and completely over-the-top. And they didn't have to do that.

>which is compleltey different

Well on the tabletop you can make your tieflings look lke whatever.
4e also had tons of tiefling subraces with different apeparences due to the Dragon magazine and later books.

but as we all know, video games, as a visual medium, shape perception. Baldurs Gate obviously shaped the perception what DnD ought to be for a lot of people, this forum is more than enaugh proof of that if you ask me.

So i think my arugment stands, 4e didnt invent "Cute horned devil" tieflings. It codified them, and its not the fault of 4e or Nentir vale that lazy writers adopted the look for Forgotten Realms because it got popular.

Also original tieflings were rare and pretty much planescape only thing

>thy chose to make the niform visual identity ridiculous, cartoonish, shallow

well look at elves and warves and any other basic player race.
thats what you get when you land in the PHB