A Good Story

Remove all ads!

Err... Honestly i think the best storyline 4 a prequel would be 4 charname to be liked time-traveled to be4 candlekeep by some evil mage or something n he has to save himself or you're a char that(if good) you help the harpers rescue lil charname or (if bad) get screwed by the cultists of Bhaal, want revenge, and help the Harpers anyway like in BG2 u either doin it to find Imoen or beatdown Irenicus .

 

I'm most in favor of the story being about Balduran and his merry band of piratey cutthroats. Arrrr!
Seriously, what better character for a prequel to BG that goes back to the city of Baldur's Gate. Plus, we never did find out what happened to Balduran himself...

 

I agree with Kam to an extent. I don't believe it should have anyting to do with the Bhaal saga and should instead focus on Baldur's Gate. If they do want it to have something to do with the Bhaal saga, why not something about the Iron Throne?

 

I agree with Abomination. What if the game has you play the founder of the Iron Throne? Political and economical intrigues abound! And finally, an RPG where you HAVE to be the bad guy!

 

Not exactly taking a role in the founding of the Iron Throne - you don't want to force the PC to be evil, it is a role playing game after all so the PC should be given the choice. Rather it could bet set DURING the time the Iron Throne was being founded and you affect that process it indirectly.

 

Iron Throne would be a good extra. But I see no reason to make a prequel unless it was directly involved in the Bhaalspawn Saga.

I mean, making BG3 with nothing to do with Charname would be like making a new Dirty Harry movie with no dirty Harry. I think the PC being involved in Gorion and how he saved Charname from the temple of Bhaal not only a great idea. I think it's compulsory for the story to make any sense.

And while the story may end with Baldur's Gate, it's obvious it can't be limited to that city only. One of the biggest things in any fantasy games is the adventure. Being in one city all the time hardly has that much possibility for adventure, aside from the brick buildings and stone walls, that is.

And seriously, time warps, clonings, etc? Come on. We're not talking about an ö-rated movie here (ö being the last alphabet in Finland), we're talking about an ingenious roleplaying game with a plot that's a little above the most used cliché's in the world, at least. Obviously Charname's adventures have been concluded, from beginning as well as the end. There's nothing more to add unless it's about the God Charname establishing his power over Faerún. And that's hardly going to be the case, prequel or not.

 

I still don't see why they want to make it about Charname. Can't they just leave the Bhaal saga alone? It's pretty much complete, anything else would be forced and would be too predictable. You have to admit that the Baldur's Gate games had good surprises and turning points.

The idea of an RPG prequel is rather... well... stupid. You already know what is going to happen and it forces the PC to end the game in ONE WAY or in a way that doesn't affect the other games because otherwise the other games that it is based on would have to change.

 

How does it do that, really?

I mean, in the beginning of BG2 you already pretty much know you're going to become a God sooner or later (at least that's the way I always figured it). So the choice is what, to either not become one, or to become one, like in ToB. Oh and of course the third one, to die trying.

Well I suppose the lack of freedom to be able to die trying in BG3, effectively failing to save Charname from the temple would be a problem to some. Not to me however.

Sarcasm set aside, games have been made since forever with prophiecies and predictions making the main storyline. Heck, BG1&2 is all about prophecies of Alaundo come true, with some extra spice to it. What's the problem with knowing the prophecy yourself instead of reading about it while playing? It still doesn't change anything except the consequences of the ending.

PC can be anything he wants, from good to evil. A great celebrated hero, or a malicious evil emperor. The only thing that must be, is that somehow, Charname survives out of the temple with Gorion, and Sarevok is left behind. And that there is no reason for anyone to ever bring PC's name up in BG1 & 2. That's not much of a limitation if you asked me. Most games are build in tighter frames than that. In fact, pretty much all of them are.

I actually think a prequel a great idea. But it MUST be about Charname. I just don't see another way. BG 1 & 2 is all about Charname. Even if the name Baldur's Gate is used in the different console games as well, in PC there is but one meaning for Baldur's Gate. It's the tale of the Charname, from birth to death/godhood.

If Baldur's Gates were any more splintered, then perhaps they would be open for a prequel that only told of the world with its events and heroes in general. Much like Matrix and Animatrix. But with Forgotten Realms Faerún being as well known as it is, and with the games so far focusing explicitly on Charname, it just can't be done IMO. BG3 is BG, part 3. The name itself bounds it to be a continuation to the story of Charname that started with BG1.

As I said, the knowledge of what will be only adds to the experience in my case. As I don't see that as something that MUST limit the gaming into a linear and predictable event, unless the developer team is a bunch of uncreative amateurs. It's like finally being told the answers and history of a story and a question that've been keeping people wondering for so long.

 

The fact that the development team is making a prequel shows that they are uncreative. In Baldur's Gate you had a choice and reason for killing *SPOILER*vok whether you were good or evil, either way was justified.

A prophecy doesn't mean it MUST HAPPEN but the fact that charname, Sarevok, *SPOILER* Imoen and other Bhaalspawn (especially if they are members of 'The Five') escape is something that must happen.

Orlando only predicted Bhaal creating a score of mortal children, being killed and those children causing chaos. Two definate events - having children and being killed - however creating chaos depends on what you view chaos to be.

Since we know nothing of any mentionable assistance that Gorion recieved apart from his Harper friends it can be assumed that the BG3 PC will have to be a Harper or he wasn't at the rescue. The development team is going to have to be VERY creative and look at events WAY before the temple rescue of charname if they want to make this an RPG for characters of any gender, race, class or alignment.

Besides, we don't really wonder much more about charname. We know everything of any interest about him. Why can't they just let the Bhaalspawn saga alone? I think it was pretty damn conclusive.

 

I'm actually very interested. It would definitely shed a new light on BG1 and 2, should they succeed in making BG3 good enough.

It's not that hard to make a plot that "forces" you to do something crucial for the saving of Charname even against your will. Basically, PC could be unaware of the whole thing, going after their own agenda. Just that Charname's birth and being saved by the hands of Gorion has to be in there.

And as has been discussed here already, there is no reason why the PC should be in league with Gorion. He might as well be against him, or with him not as a harper, but as a necessary evil in a temporary alliance to achieve something both desire. If PC was just just one of gorion's friends, then mentioning them would be useless in BG1 & 2 since after the assumed events of BG3 Gorion was the only person whose name really needed to be known and remembered. Same case with evil characters.

BG1 & 2 really make no mention of much anything aside from Gorion himself. Which is only because Gorion is the closest thing to real father either Charname or Imoen could've had. There is no mention of anything else, though surely there was much else involved than just one Gorion and his vague harper friends.

Still, in the end I say the same I did before. Wether you think the Bhaalspawn saga conclusive or not, there's still the matter of making a part 3 to an obviously existing storyline. If they made another game, fine, they could make it whatever they wished. But the fact that they make BG3 means they are going to continue the story of BG1 & 2, wether you like it or not. Avoiding that is no longer a possibility. Should they make a story that has nothing to do with Charname at all, then all it will be is a very cheap marketing trick.

In any case, what we have here once again is a difference in opinion. No use to take 2 pages debating over something we won't agree of anyway. If the dev's screw it up, it's their business. But simply making a prequel, with a story that evolves around the beginning stages of the coming "Bhaalspawn era", does not seem a bad idea to me.

 

Obviously the game would struggle to be about <charname> directly, as playing as a kid would be boring. But thats not to say it won't have some sort of link to the future stories of <charname>, Imoen, Gorion blah blah blah. Maybe have the chance to have Gorion in your party (poor geza didn't have a chance in the first, and those dreams just got on my nerves big time), and mybe Elminster or Volo. Maybe your charter could be of noble origin but banished from the sword cost after being framed for treason or somthing, only to stumble upon clues leading to a conspiracy leading straight back to the events at Baldur's Gate and thus the story from BG1. But either way they do it, it will suck.

I'm still very wary as to if this will be a challenging title for BG2 (as in my opinion there is little out there that has a better story line to it). If Bioware think that making it 3D and adding +1 to the title will get it off the shelves they've got anbother thing coming, been there, done that, brought and wasted money on NWN already, LMAO at that.

 

Foradasthar, it probably WILL be a cheap marketing trick.

And besides, IMO, even if they do make BG3 about Charname, and just forcibly insert the saving of Charname by Gorion (which, according to you, HAS to be in there), I'd still call it a marketing trick. A bit more elaborate perhaps, since instead of being limited to the title it will encompass a completely irrelevant event in the game that only exists there because there must be a tie-in to the other games.

Frankly, I just hope they make a good game. Making it "spiritually" (so to speak) realted to the BG games could probably help. However, if it has to be linked story-wise by any means necessary, I don't see this as a good thing. Let a good writer decide whether to link or not - but let him pick whichever decision makes the game better. And if it ends up being a marketing trick with a good game underneath, I'll gladly play it.

Remember, the BIS game had absolutely nothing to do with the previous BG games either. It could have been good nevertheless. We'll never know.

 

i think the best thing to do is,not to make any BG3.They should just make a new game with a new title.If they make a BG3,they will think they should put somethings from BG1 and 2.This will complicate things and they won't be able to build a good storyline.BG2 and BG1 are legends because they have excellent plots.I think the producers just have to concentrate on a new game with a detailed storyline and intresting NPCs and PCs.I think the producers are just takeing the shortcut by makeing a sequel to an already classic RPG game
PS:If there will be a BG3,it should have an isometric play view!That is the soul of BG

 

@shadowdrinker:
Yeah, i agree totally with ur "no BG3" statement. The loose ends were tied up comphrensively in ToB, but... can you see ANY company turning down that sales boost? Its like The Bourne Supremacy.... they killed too many characters in the movie version to make the Bourne Ultimatum now.

 

Jeez, guys this topic is for your imagination, nothing else.

 

Assuming that we're dealing with a prequel, locating it within the Time Of Troubles and dealing with the origins of the BG1/2 PC doesn't have to be the sole focus of the game. It could very easily be a side quest with a joinable NPC (Gorion) triggering it, although I would argue that if it was done like the Copper Coronet/Slavers/Guarded Compound/Twisted Rune quest thread and developed throughout the game, culminating in the attack on the Banite temple. That would allow the game to retain a lot of flexibility while still making reference to the original BG series. To remove the annoying loss of a developed NPC, maybe Gorion could work like Drizzt in the battle with Bodhi in BG2 - a non-controllable ally. Of course, since you needn't do that quest, it doesn't take centre stage.

Personally, I'd much prefer something from the Time of Troubles - you have fear and panic all over the place, gods walking the land in mortal form, magic not working properly. The time just screams for an adventure, because that's exactly when the greatest of heroes emerge. You could build around the legends of the Time of Troubles (Mystra, Kelemvor, Cyric, etc) and either try to restore the balance or use the chaos to carve out your own dominion. It's got potential, I just don't think it needs to adhere to the storyline of BG1 and BG2 so slavishly.

Of course, that requires a little something else called originality from the game designers. I don't want to see the excellent legacy of Baldur's Gate prostituted for the sake of money - I want another game of similar quality. That means a lot of effort, a lot of planning, and a solid plot.

 

Well spoken NonSequitur. I particularly second your thoughts concerning the Time of Troubles - if the game is set in that time period, incorporating references (subtle and not so subtle) to the BG series goes much smoother, since the events in BG are a direct consequence of the Time of Troubles. Now, let's hope the designers read your post. And that, however they decide to do it, they give us a solid, good game.

 

I never actually thought about the past unitl BG3 was heard of. I guess it would eb a good change to have a new, exciting adventure, away from teh other BG games.

OFF TOPIC: Have you ever wondered how they originally thought up the BG saga. I think they might have played a game of D&D, then touched it up at the end, making it into a game! Any answers or ideas?

 

What if you got to play as Bhaal himself, or one of this followers, and the "bad guy" in the plot was Cyric...that would be interesting, but predictable, since we all know Cyric kills Bhaal in the end.

 

Playing as Bhaal!? And what would your objective be, to mate with as many different humanoid species as possible? (ahhh, time for the fire giant quest...)