| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Windrider |
Posted - 18 Jul 2019 : 03:50:40
From this Polygon article:
[Baldur's Gate 3] will be the sequel to an upcoming module for the modern D&D tabletop RPG. Called Baldur’s Gate: Descent into Avernus, that module takes place about 100 years before Baldur’s Gate 3 even begins. [...] The events of Descent into Avernus must happen before the events of Baldur’s Gate 3, and maintaining that order is literally Mearls’ job.
Does anyone else get the impression that some wires got crossed in the interview? Or do you think BG3 really going to be set in the 1590s DR? |
| 7 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| DeBasilisk |
Posted - 25 Jul 2019 : 01:59:34
Hello all. First time posting. Just wanted to comment on a clue to the puzzle of when these products occur in realmslore. The cover of the Descent book shows Zariel, and the advertising material mentions her as well. In the 14th century up to the end of 3.5 published material, Zariel was still imprisoned and Bel was in charge of Avernus, and as of fifth edition Zariel has been "recently" reinstated by Asmodeus. To my knowledge the exact date has not been revealed. I sat out 4th edition, but from what I understand Bel was still in charge then as well. So, based on the assumption that the cover featuring Zariel implied that she is back in power (maybe an unfair assumption, but one I am ok making), then BG3 does indeed take place in the late 16th century if it takes place 100 years post Descent. If I'm missing anything though, please correct me! |
| Demzer |
Posted - 19 Jul 2019 : 17:50:04
Well the interview contained a lot of very vague hints at the Big Picture that only the designers can see which is all well and good but then the designers play their own game and we play our own and these loose touch with each other.
quote:
Originally posted by Windrider
Does anyone else get the impression that some wires got crossed in the interview? Or do you think BG3 really going to be set in the 1590s DR?
On this specific point I actually think there are two possible explanations: either Descent is in 1390s-1400s and BG3 is current timeline or Descent is current timeline and BG3 is so far in the future to not matter to the Realms continuity (unless at some point Mearls successor will decide for another 100 years time jump ... and then someone will point out that they forgot about the lore in BG3 and someone will screw up again ...)
To be honest envisaging a world where nobody in setting cares about dates and the passing of time is well ... not smart nor logical by any stretch of the imagination but to each their own. |
| Caolin |
Posted - 19 Jul 2019 : 17:17:35
quote:
Originally posted by Irennan
Mearls is so full of sh*t there. The way he pretends to "see a connection" between all campaign. Dude, seriously, how can you even know about people's campaigns and their events/characters, let alone homebrew worlds that might have NOTHING to do with standard D&D canon, or campaigns set in non-D&D settings but that still use D&D rules--and let alone see "a connection". They just want free hype for their game and are making this stuff up for that; my money on the absence of anything substantial that they're doing.
Yeah this quote kind of put everything together for me. Why there hasn't been a campaign setting and why there probably never will be one. They don't want Dungeon Masters anymore. They want game managers who will run their modules (is this what they still call them?) the way they intended. Stick to the script, buy the next adventure for your players, and STFU. It never occurred to me that they would prefer to not have independent DMs creating their own material and stories within FR because that doesn't sell books. But this sure does seem like what's going on. |
| Irennan |
Posted - 18 Jul 2019 : 18:11:06
quote:
Originally posted by Caolin
quote:
“It’s going to sound super — maybe this is not super pretentious, maybe it will just sound creepy,” Mearls said, his face breaking into a self-conscious half grin. “The way I think about [...] it is that we’re like, the masters of Dungeon Masters. Everyone’s running their campaign [at home], but there’s another layer that we’re in where we see how everything — very deeply — might connect. You may never see that connection surfaced, not ever. But, it’s influencing how we’re doing things. And maybe someday we will surface it. Maybe we won’t.”
Oh gods. 
Mearls is so full of sh*t there. The way he pretends to "see a connection" between all campaign. Dude, seriously, how can you even know about people's campaigns and their events/characters, let alone homebrew worlds that might have NOTHING to do with standard D&D canon, or campaigns set in non-D&D settings but that still use D&D rules--and let alone see "a connection". They just want free hype for their game and are making this stuff up for that; my money on the absence of anything substantial that they're doing.
|
| Caolin |
Posted - 18 Jul 2019 : 17:26:35
quote:
“It’s going to sound super — maybe this is not super pretentious, maybe it will just sound creepy,” Mearls said, his face breaking into a self-conscious half grin. “The way I think about [...] it is that we’re like, the masters of Dungeon Masters. Everyone’s running their campaign [at home], but there’s another layer that we’re in where we see how everything — very deeply — might connect. You may never see that connection surfaced, not ever. But, it’s influencing how we’re doing things. And maybe someday we will surface it. Maybe we won’t.”
Oh gods. |
| Windrider |
Posted - 18 Jul 2019 : 04:07:52
I don't know much about Larian—the Diablo comparisons and the objectively stupid name prevented me from giving Divine Divinity a chance back in the day, and I haven't gotten around to the series since. |
| LordofBones |
Posted - 18 Jul 2019 : 03:57:21
No doubt Larian will be debuting with 7th edition D&D.
I kind of wonder what would have happened if Owlcat got their hands on the license. Kingmaker was a buggy mess on release, but they did a marvelous job with it since. |
|
|
