Author Topic: Children of Bhaal  (Read 28527 times)

hlidskialf

  • Guest
Children of Bhaal
« Reply #25 on: April 15, 2003, 08:02:32 PM »
Quote
Possibly, Fate lended a hand.
Methinks "fate" should be named "Melissan".  B)  

klaussner

  • Guest
Children of Bhaal
« Reply #26 on: May 05, 2003, 11:27:30 AM »
If Sarevok was grown up when The pc was a child, how come in one of the solar dialog Gorion said he had to choose between Sarevok and the pc as children?  This makes sense only if the pc is an elf and they are around 30 or 40, but then what about Imoen?

T.G.Maestro

  • Guest
Children of Bhaal
« Reply #27 on: May 05, 2003, 12:31:32 PM »
You know klaussner, that's exactly what I keep talkin' about for a while... there are several small "mistakes" in ToB's storyline.

Kish

  • Guest
Children of Bhaal
« Reply #28 on: May 05, 2003, 01:21:16 PM »
Quote
If Sarevok was grown up when The pc was a child, how come in one of the solar dialog Gorion said he had to choose between Sarevok and the pc as children?
Pretty much everything about Sarevok (except that he once tried to start a war in Baldur's Gate) is retconned in ToB.

Soulbringer

  • Guest
Children of Bhaal
« Reply #29 on: May 21, 2003, 04:01:00 PM »
Quote
I have a question Sorry, if this was already answered before, but somehow it keeps bothering me.
As I know, Bhaal planted his sseds into his "children" nearly at the same time (or at least at the Time of Troubles). Now, these children were born at the same time as well, right? This would be well and fine, if there were only humans. There are references in the game that you are the same age as Imoen, and parhaps Sarevok as well. BUT. In ToB there are very-very interesting children: a Fire Giant, a Drow, and most of all a Dragon! And they seem to be quite in an 'adult' stage. And here comes my problem. How is it possible, that these creatures were born at the same time and are the same age (around 25-30 or so?). To reach adulthood, a Yaga-Shura should be at least 100-150, Sendai around 500 and Abazigal...well maybe a few thousand years? :blink:  This stinks a bit. At least to me. Or am I missing something important?
Any comments on this one would be appreciated!
To start with the very beginning, Bhaal could have know about the his death thousans of year before if the overlord had let him (we arent told anything about that), Abizigal and his son are both half dragons wich mean the age a little slower than humans, Aloundo or what ever that fools name was made many foreseeings wich only about 10 of them ever came true (the BS afair is included).
To brake it down to peices AO could decide how much and how little Bhaal were to know about the Times of Troubles. Mystra her self foresaw it and created her chosen because she foresaw her own destruction and as you know they are about 500 years each or something like that (thats a hell of a lot more than 10 years).

MagusWizardo

  • Guest
Children of Bhaal
« Reply #30 on: May 31, 2003, 05:55:05 AM »
Quote
If Sarevok was grown up when The pc was a child, how come in one of the solar dialog Gorion said he had to choose between Sarevok and the pc as children?  This makes sense only if the pc is an elf and they are around 30 or 40, but then what about Imoen?
Sarevok was grown up when the protagonist was a child *from Sarevok's point of view*. This could very well mean that Sarevok felt you were 'boyish', ie - you haven't matured much emotionally compared to him.
 Also, Gorion and Alianna say specifically that you were a baby, but the spirit of Sarevok from that time is quite obviously a bit older than that. He could well have been 6 or 7 judging by his voice. But you were a baby, and we get the impression that you were very newly born (a year, maybe). Which allows a deviation of about 4 to 5 years between the PCs age and Sarevok's.
 The BG1 intro says you are 20. This would make Sarevok 24-25. You have lived in seclusion, in candlekeep, all of your life. You have an emotional attachment to Gorion still. Sarevok in that time has been wondering about Faerûn all his life, growing up, maturing. Which would fit in with you being 'boyish' in his eyes.
 "You and Sarevok are products of the time of troubles". This could quite easily mean that Sarevok was born toward the beggining of the Time of Troubles, and you toward the end. From other in-game evidance, I get the impression that the Time of Troubles lasted for quite a while, and simply reached it's climax in 1358 DR. This would also allow for a few years deviation in age between "products of the time of troubles".
 And with Bhaal esscence possibly making you mature faster, think about it carefully - this would have to be true. If the PC is an Elf, a Dwarf, or even a Gnome (possibly a halfling aswell), and they aged at the normal rate for their race, at 20 years old (from the BG1 intro speech to Candlekeep), you wouldn't be out of nappies yet. Infact, you wouldn't know how to crawl or make gurgling and crying sounds yet. Therefore, the PC *must* have aged faster to be able to walk around so readily at 20 years old, unless the PC is human. If the PC must have had this effect of the taint, then it is not only possible, but also quite probable, that other Bhaalspawn have been affected in similar ways.
 On the issue of the Bhaal essence, Solar seems very certain that yours is the last.  As a direct servant of Ao, Solar would have a good chance of being right about something like this. Mellisan is also quite sure that she has all of it in her collection, ready to meld to herself. She would also have a good chance of knowing, being a former priestess to Bhaal, and the one who knows the rites to bring him back, she would know how much esscence there should be collected there.
 What happens to Viekang if you teleport him out of Saradush ?? Well, there's nothing to say he didn't teleport to Amkethran, where Balthazar promptly found him, gave him a speech about getting rid of bhaalspawn, and killed him.  BUT, there could also be another explanation - Mellisan removed his fear, you had to cause him fear magically to allow him to teleport. If this doesn't cause him to get scared again without magic, then maybe - just maybe - those hunters finally caught up to him. Or maybe, it was Balthazar who was after Viekang all along, and the hunters are his monks ??
 What happened to Sarevok ?? Nothing. He isn't a Bhaalspawn anymore.
 What happened to Imoen ?? Since Mellisan hasn't actually begun the final rites (she needs *your* esscence aswell), she could very well have gotten Imoen after you destroyed your Pocket Plane, unless Imoen is with you at the time, in which case she doesn't need to.
 What happened to Chinchilla, Tibit, Merlinious and Toop the Brave ?? Someone killed them, ofcourse. :P
 What about the child of the protagonist ?? Quayle (your son by Aerie) is young enough to be stripped of the esscence by the gods without him dying. Or maybe he just got his soul from his mother's side? :D As for your son by Viconia, from  what I understand (= correct me if I'm wrong), he doesn't appear until the epilogue, meaning he is born after your esscence is removed from you. Meaning, he probably won't have any. Or, again, his soul may have come from his mother's side.  
 On the most ancient continuity issue of "why can Imoen and Sarevok be resurected, aren't they Bhaalspawn too ??", Sarevok is *not* a Bhaalspawn (by his own words he doesn't have enough essence in him), and while he still *is* a Bhaalspawn (ie, in Bg1) he does dissolve. He is resurected only by your power in the Throne of Blood. As for Imoen, since the taint affects everyone differently, it could be a uniquity for Imoen that her taint can be called back from the abyss, and that it doesn't go into her *physical* self. Which would also explain how she can give it up willingly when she doesn't have the amount of power that you do in the Blood Throne. Although, this wouldn't exactly be a uniquity - I believe that there is another Bhaalspawn who's body doesn't dissolve when they die. No points for guessing exactly *who*.

Infact, in the whole game (well, the main storyline atleast), I have only two issues with continuity: why, why, why does Irenicus have two copies of his first Journal ?? And why is one of them in a barrel ??  

Paddy

  • Guest
Children of Bhaal
« Reply #31 on: May 31, 2003, 09:13:26 AM »
I'm not sure that I buy this Bhaal-aging process. If it's true then a twenty year old human would look like Rush Limbaugh, and I don't think Aerie, Viconia or Jaheira would touch that with a barge pole.
What I'd like to know is how Sarevok knew that the pc was Bhaal-spawn, and why he didn't notice the taint in Imoen.

Mikka

  • Guest
Children of Bhaal
« Reply #32 on: June 02, 2003, 08:46:55 PM »
Woah, woah, woah.

Baldur's Gate 1 has two 'official' dates- 1368, and 1373.  The game and book say 1363, the game manual says 1373.  However, Baldur's Gate 2 clearly takes place in 1369 and 1370 (references to the 'Year of the Tankard', Waukeen is still imprisoned (she escapes late in 1370), and so on).  Thus, it seems safe to assume that Baldur's Gate 1 takes place in 1368.  You are twenty in the game, so you were born in 1348 (or perhaps early in 1349).

The Time of Troubles took ONE year to happen.  The Year of Shadows, 1358.  In this year, Bane, Bhaal, Myrkul, Mystra, and Torm are destroyed, and Cyric, Midnight, and Finder Wyvernspur become Gods (and the Shadow Thieves loose dominance of Calishite and flee to Amn, if anyone cares).

Using that date, you would be ten years old in Baldur's Gate 1 using the one official date, and fifteen using the other.  Baldur's Gate one pits you at twenty, thus, you were clearly born before the Time of Troubles.  Bhaal was on Toril during 1345 and 1346- a bit too early to have birthed you, but the closest we can get (actually, acording to the Darkwalker and Darkwell novels, he was banished to the Outer Planes- and thus shouldn't have been able to walk on Faerun at all till forced at the Time of Troubles- but the Forgotten Realms is full of inconsistantcies, I suppose).


The thing that I want to know is if the Solar is a true servant of Ao.  I don't think so, mainly for the reason that Ao has no power on the planes- less then the Lesser Gods, due to the fact that he doesn't have a realm or worshipers.  Ao is in sole control of the single-sphere of Toril (or perhaps just Faerun- whether he controls Kara-Tur, Al-Quadim, and everywhere else is debatable), but he has no pentitoners, no realm, no worshipers, no faith.  However, in the novels, Ao talks with a silvery figure, which is persumed to be his Overlord.  Maybe there's someone even higher then Ao spinning the wheel.

More then likely, though, the Solar is a servant of some power, perhaps not even one from Realmspace, who is trying to see if the Bhaalspawn is a threat and can be converted to 'true goodness'.  Or maybe it's Lathander or Illmater.  Or perhaps it's some lone Solar on it's own, who's a servant of nobody but is trying to see what's going on.  But it's just an interesting oversight- or so we assume, anyway.



One thing that bugs me is that Cyric is clearly sane when you talk to him in ToB.  Although the sourcebook states that his trial took place in 1369, the novel itself states that the event took place three years after Prince of Lies- and Princes of Lies happened in 1368.  Meaning Cyric's sanity doesn't come back till 1371.  Now, it's possible that some Bhaalspawn might have sat around and took that much time to get to ToB, but most managed to get there in 1370, when he was still insane.  Argh.

Riona

  • Guest
Children of Bhaal
« Reply #33 on: June 02, 2003, 09:02:21 PM »
Quote
Actually, I think its mentioned somewhere that Bhaal had quite a bit of advanced notice about his death, and so started his family well in advance of the Time of Troubles.
That is correct--and they were not all born at the same time, either.

The PC, by the way, could not have been born during the Time of Troubles (the information given to the PC in ToB is wrong).  The Time of Troubles took place in 1358 DR, only about 12 years before the BG series takes place (about 1370-1371).  The current year of the Realms is only 1372 at this time, so it hasn't even been 20 years since.  Which means, if the PC was born during the Time of Troubles...

1) The game takes place in the future and has not even taken place yet, or

2) The PC you ran around the game with was only about 12-14 years old--barely even a teenager.

I doubt either option sits well with most players.

I am only explaining this because this question of fact comes up very frequently in these debates.

Riona

  • Guest
Children of Bhaal
« Reply #34 on: June 02, 2003, 09:07:44 PM »
Quote


The Time of Troubles took ONE year to happen.  The Year of Shadows, 1358.
From what I have heard, it technically only lasted for a few months.  But then, I haven't read the Avatar Trilogy yet, so I could be wrong.  

But it definately did not last a long time, and gods can have children whenever they choose to.

The information given to you by Alianna is, simply put, a bunch of BS.  I think the designers just didn't get their facts straight there.  

Besides, I always felt the PC's mother should have been left to the imagination of the player and never have been touched by the designers.  I feel the designers also messed with Sarevok's story as well (from BG1).  That whole part was stupid.  ;)
« Last Edit: June 02, 2003, 09:16:50 PM by Riona »

Riona

  • Guest
Children of Bhaal
« Reply #35 on: June 02, 2003, 09:12:17 PM »
Quote
I'm not sure that I buy this Bhaal-aging process. If it's true then a twenty year old human would look like Rush Limbaugh, and I don't think Aerie, Viconia or Jaheira would touch that with a barge pole.
What I'd like to know is how Sarevok knew that the pc was Bhaal-spawn, and why he didn't notice the taint in Imoen.
1) Yes, I don't buy the "Bhaal aging process", either--imagine what that would do to a human!!!  I also don't buy this theory, which I have seen in debates like this:

"The PC levels up so quickly because he/she is a Bhaalspawn."

No, they level up quickly because they are highly active adventurers.

2) Imoen should never have been made a Bhaalspawn; I think they decided to that for the second game.  But that's another debate, I suppose.

But yeah, the game is not clear at all on how Sarevok "noticed the taint" simply by observing the PC, and if Imoen was always a Child of Bhaal, why didn't he notice it in her???

Riona

  • Guest
Children of Bhaal
« Reply #36 on: June 02, 2003, 09:14:57 PM »
Quote
However, in the novels, Ao talks with a silvery figure, which is persumed to be his Overlord.  Maybe there's someone even higher then Ao spinning the wheel.

 
Yes there is.

The DM.

Who rules these worlds?  We, the players, do.

Riona

  • Guest
Children of Bhaal
« Reply #37 on: June 02, 2003, 09:23:39 PM »
Quote

Absolutely.  Bhaal was the Lord of Murder throughout most of recorded Faerun history.
 
Actually, Bhaal was God of all Death, not just Murder.  Being evil, he prefered and enjoyed violent death, but his domain was Death in it's entirety.  This comes from second edition sources, but unfortunately recent FR sources simply call Bhaal the god of murder when he is referred to.  I have the feeling that if Bhaal was merely god of Murder, he would only be a demipower or lesser power and not the intermediate power that he was.

There was no murder portfolio until Cyric came along.  As for how long Bhaal was a god?...We don't know, because there is to date no official information on when Bane, Bhaal and Myrkul rose to power.

By the way, Myrkul was the Lord of the Dead (among many other things) but not death.

Riona

  • Guest
Children of Bhaal
« Reply #38 on: June 02, 2003, 09:25:43 PM »
Quote

Tmk, the only bit of evidence for this is, "During the Time of Troubles did great Bhaal come and whisper in my ear," spoken by the ghost of Alianna.

It contradicts various other sources already quoted in this thread.  It also contradicts logic, as Bhaal could hardly create children invested with divine essence when he himself lacked access to his own divine essence.
It also contradicts official FR lore, which--for me--has the edge over what is stated in the game.

Riona

  • Guest
Children of Bhaal
« Reply #39 on: June 02, 2003, 09:28:44 PM »
Quote



Bhaal also could not know of the time of troubles a 1000 years earlier because except for AO gods can only see a most a few tendays into the future so  the bhaal essence in Yaga-shura, sendai, and abazigal must have caused them to age at a rapid rate.
I think Bhaal may have made some type of deal with Savaras (sp???) that ancient god of divination. *wink*

Nothing is impossible when it comes to FR, anyway.

Mikka

  • Guest
Children of Bhaal
« Reply #40 on: June 02, 2003, 09:33:20 PM »
The Silvery Figure being the DM is only one opinion- the writers haven't issued a true or false.  Other ideas are that it's the spirit of Toril (the land itself), Death (with a capital D!), Io (perhaps), Alastor (that would be cool, but no), Asmodeus (I wish), the first High Magi (I doubt it), the Writer (likely, writers are prone to doing that), the first dragon (another doubtful one), the Wanderer (yet another doubtful one), Graz'zt (um, no no no), Rajaat (how in the world would Rajaat be overpowering Ao?), the Dark Powers (that would be more then slightly frightening), the Lady of Pain (since when was she Silvery White?  And why would she care about some stupid Prime World?), a Rilmani (at this point, I think we were coming up with crossovers just for the sake of having crossovers), and many other random people/creatures/things.

My vote is for the Writer, the DM, or Toril's spirit.  Or perhaps a personification of himself- Ao divided in to two 'halfs'.



As for Sarevok and Imoen, that's another one of those oversights.  Irenicus claims that her cheerfulness hid it- perhaps Sarevok knew CHARNAME had the taint because he heard CHARNAME talking about his/her dreams of murder and other awakening signs, not because of physically seeing it.  Or maybe Gorion was able to hide the taint in Imoen- as in, CHARNAME was the 'decoy' Bhaalspawn, and Imoen the hidden one.  Perhaps the taint is only visible after a certain time (IE, it only develops when your twenty or over), and thus when he saw Imoen, she was too young to have it visible.
Or maybe the game designers just made an error.
Which one do you vote for? -_-



EDITED :: Supposedly, Myrkul, Bane, and Bhaal got their portfollo's by playing a game of knuckleheads as Malar ran around chasing after skulls.  Does anyone besides me really hope that actually wasn't the case? *_*;
« Last Edit: June 02, 2003, 09:37:40 PM by Mikka »

Riona

  • Guest
Children of Bhaal
« Reply #41 on: June 02, 2003, 09:50:06 PM »
Quote


As for Sarevok and Imoen, that's another one of those oversights.  Irenicus claims that her cheerfulness hid it- perhaps Sarevok knew CHARNAME had the taint because he heard CHARNAME talking about his/her dreams of murder and other awakening signs, not because of physically seeing it.  Or maybe Gorion was able to hide the taint in Imoen- as in, CHARNAME was the 'decoy' Bhaalspawn, and Imoen the hidden one.  Perhaps the taint is only visible after a certain time (IE, it only develops when your twenty or over), and thus when he saw Imoen, she was too young to have it visible.
Or maybe the game designers just made an error.
Which one do you vote for? -_-
 
Ultimately, I think the silvery figure is the DM--there is evidence suggesting this (I recall there is mention of a place were "assignments like this began and ended"--paraphased of course--that seems like a description of a home campaign).  The DM is ideally supposed to be someone both "harsh and kind".  Yes, it is just speculation, but ultimately, we *ARE* more powerful than AO, because the DM is free to do what he wants with his game and may do with the Realms as he/she wishes.

Alright, now for the Imoen situation:

--I never bought into the whole "Imoen's powers were hidden because she was more cheerful" simply because there is no reason that the PC cannot be as cheerful as well.  

--By the way, I never really consider Imoen to be a Bhaalspawn anyway and I think the whole plot about her being Gorion's "second ward" is a bit silly.  Being the admittedly arrogant player that I am, I don't like the idea of my character being a "decoy Bhaalspawn" but that is just how I see it. ;)

--I know Sarevok mentions that he "saw all the signs" in the PC, but what signs were those?  Does it actually say that the PC was describing strange dreams?  I ask this because I was unaware that the PC was having *serious* dreams about his/her taint until you get that first dream with Gorion (in the game).  After all, the taint *is* a mystery to the player while he/she is growing up.

I think I'll have to go with the idea that a person doesn't realize how they are until they reach a certain age.

Unfortunately (or, fortunately?) the game never explains exactly how Sarevok recognized the taint in you (and thus, set the stage for the entire series).

NiGHTMARE

  • Guest
Children of Bhaal
« Reply #42 on: June 02, 2003, 10:17:39 PM »
Yes, BG2 is definitely set during 1370, unless the news the town criers deliver (e.g. about the Sythillisian empire) is either very out of date or from the future ;)

Riona

  • Guest
Children of Bhaal
« Reply #43 on: June 02, 2003, 10:22:40 PM »
Quote
Yes, BG2 is definitely set during 1370, unless the news the town criers deliver (e.g. about the Sythillisian empire) is either very out of date or from the future ;)
Yes, I don't think the numbers in the journal are correct.  But then, even the designers themselves have admitted that they aren't sure when the game takes place.

Samuel Coyote

  • Guest
Children of Bhaal
« Reply #44 on: June 02, 2003, 11:45:30 PM »
This debate is still going strong, eh?

I think that explaining most of these things are pointless, because they're only there because someone made mistakes, didn't do enough background research, or got a good idea halfway through the game.

"You know, it seems that Imoen really doesn't make much sense. Maybe she should be a bhaalspawn too?"

"It seems kind of plain to have only humanoid bhaalspawn, maybe one should be a dragon?"

"Opps, elves age slower than humans? Didn't know that.."

As for the 'essence of bhaal makes you age faster' theory, wouldn't an elf/dwarf aging as fast as a human draw quite a bit of attention? Everyone in candlekeep  would know there was something wrong with you. Its just 'one of those things that doesn't make sense'.  

Riona

  • Guest
Children of Bhaal
« Reply #45 on: June 03, 2003, 12:01:53 AM »
Quote
This debate is still going strong, eh?

I think that explaining most of these things are pointless, because they're only there because someone made mistakes, didn't do enough background research, or got a good idea halfway through the game.
 
Yes, you're right.  Not to mention the fact that the design team for each game each had different people in it...for example, I recall that Dave Gaider once said he didn't design the BG1 story but he played a huge role in making the second one.

MagusWizardo

  • Guest
Children of Bhaal
« Reply #46 on: June 03, 2003, 01:51:07 AM »
It has been brought up that the DM has full control over what happens in their campaign. It is the same story with a computer game - the designers are the DM. They can bend rules for their campaign (the game), they can contradict other campaigns and lore because of this power.
 This means that they could very well have made the time of troubles last longer for the purposes of this game, which they DM.

Eld/Dwarf aging faster would be noticed - so, maybe, more people than Gorion knew that you were a Bhaalspawn. This would also explain how Sarevok recognised the taint in you, and not in Imoen. Someone told him. "Oh", you say, "but that would only work for a non-human PC" - unless there was also some other reason why others knew. So, lets see if there's any evidence ingame to support this... dum, de dum... why, yes there is. When Gorion talks to you in the Pocket Plane, he gives the impression that he had acomplices, that somebody else knew what he was doing, and what was happening. "But", you say, "wouldn't everyone in Candlekeep have noticed if the PC was a rapidly ageing Elf"... not if Gorion & Co had illusioned you to look like what you aged as (human). Which could be why Sarevok killed Gorion - he wanted to figure out which one was you, and the illusion wore off when Gorion fell. Why, then, did your avatar not change at that point ?? Well, maybe *you* didn't see yourself as any other than what you actually were.
And so why wasn't Imoen betrayed to Sarevok ?? Because only Gorion knew that she was Bhaalspawn. Evidence from TOB suggests that she was rescued at a different time to you. Maybe she just wondered in from the street. Gorion could very well have trained himself to recognise Bhaalspawn, explaining how he knew Imoen was one. It is obvious that this is possible - Irenicus seems to be able to do it, Mellisan can do it, The Five would be lost without it. "But", say you, "all but Irenicus have connections with Bhaal, and Jon could have just done his research well". Well, say I, maybe Gorion was another Bhaalspawn, or a former follower of Bhaal, who, like Balthazar, is trying to prevent Bhaal's return. There is no evidance against this in the game, and it would also explain how he knew about Alianna's task.

As for the year the game takes place, well, maybe the town cryers are behind the times ?? Maybe the programmers put them in for a laugh ??  

NiGHTMARE

  • Guest
Children of Bhaal
« Reply #47 on: June 03, 2003, 10:31:29 AM »
Don't forget there's those Sythillisian deserters in Umar hills.

Actually, I've been doing some research.

In 1370, in the FR equivalent of March, the Sythillisians fiirst becomes a major threat (after being granted help by a group of Cyricists), and Amn loses 15 ships on their way to Helmsport... both of which are mentioned in-game.
 
The equivalent of August 1370 is when numerous Amnish towns and cities are either captured or destroyed by the Sythillisians... including Trademeet (as if those damned Druids and genies weren't enough! ;)) There certainly isn't any mention of this in-game.

So that must mean BG2: SoA takes place sometime between late March and early August (or Ches and Eleasias to give them their proper Faerunian names) 1370.  It may well be possible to narrow it down even further.
« Last Edit: June 03, 2003, 10:54:53 AM by NiGHTMARE »

Riona

  • Guest
Children of Bhaal
« Reply #48 on: June 03, 2003, 12:00:36 PM »
Quote
It has been brought up that the DM has full control over what happens in their campaign. It is the same story with a computer game - the designers are the DM. They can bend rules for their campaign (the game), they can contradict other campaigns and lore because of this power.
 This means that they could very well have made the time of troubles last longer for the purposes of this game, which they DM.
 
It is not actually stated anywhere in the game that the Time of Troubles lasted longer than a few months to a year.  The idea that the ToT lasted longer is wrong according to the FR timeline and has no basis in the game, either.

Besides, who is to say that the inconsistancies are not mistakes but delibarate changes?  From what I've seen of the game and from what I know of the designers, I think they sincerely did their best to follow official FR lore as closely as possible.  Even they wouldn't deny that they made mistakes and they inconsistancies happen frequently with these types of games.

If they are going to purposely make egregious changes to FR lore, then they may as well use their own world for the setting.  This is a product with the FR label on it, it *should* be consistant, or at least as consistant as possible.  So I can't say I agree that in this particular case, there is absolutely no limit to how much they can (or should) change.

The game is simliar to a home campaign, but it is not exactly the same.
« Last Edit: June 03, 2003, 12:03:46 PM by Riona »

NiGHTMARE

  • Guest
Children of Bhaal
« Reply #49 on: June 03, 2003, 12:09:39 PM »
Well, they did destroy the city of Saradush in ToB, which afaik is not a part of the official timeline.

 

With Quick-Reply you can write a post when viewing a topic without loading a new page. You can still use bulletin board code and smileys as you would in a normal post.

Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.

Name: Email:
Verification:
Type the letters shown in the picture
Listen to the letters / Request another image
Type the letters shown in the picture:
What color is grass?:
What is the seventh word in this sentence?:
What is five minus two (use the full word)?: