Jump to content

Lore


morpheus562

Recommended Posts

Crucible relies heavily on lore from various sources. The following sourcebooks served as main sources for the backstory in this mod:

Faiths & Avatars by Eric L- Boyd: A good overview of Bhaal's actions, his church and his followers

https://www.dmsguild.com/product/17569/Faiths--Avatars-2e

Jergal: Lord of the End of Everything by Eric L- Boyd: An ideal overview of Bhaal's time as a mortal and his path to godhood. Not an official book from WotC, but since the author was the same person who wrote Faiths& Avatars, it still counts as canon. 

https://www.dmsguild.com/product/346895/Jergal-Lord-of-the-End-of-Everything

Murder in Baldur's Gate by Matt Sernett: Explains what happens after the Bhaalspawn crisis

https://www.dmsguild.com/product/160318/Murder-in-Baldurs-Gate-5e

Edited by Acifer
Link to comment
9 hours ago, Acifer said:

Crucible relies heavily on lore from various sources. The following sourcebooks served as main sources for the backstory in this mod:

 

Murder in Baldur's Gate by Matt Sernett: Explains what happens after the Bhaalspawn crisis

https://www.dmsguild.com/product/160318/Murder-in-Baldurs-Gate-5e

Oh please tell me you aren't dragging 5e lore into this.

Link to comment

We know officially what canon is in the future. We also know in ToB the player can choose to ascend as a deity. In regards to Murder in Baldur's Gate, I try to be respectful of what is canon so the player can choose to go that route while also offering the player different options if they want to go the non-canon route, again such as ascending.

I didn't pour into that one and 5e events as much as I did the other sources.

Edited by morpheus562
Link to comment

There's like 3 or 4 different "canons" for these events. All but 1 of them ignores the games. That 1 is the games themselves. Opening up 5e lore, a whole 2 editions later, is just a huge can of worms. Especially with how unpopular 5e's additons tend to be.

Link to comment

The way I view it, anything that happens prior to the events in the game are already established by both the game or the early source material. Those are more written in stone and give right and left limits for what I can do to remain within those set events. I'm not taking anything from 5e and forcing the player with it in the mod.

Link to comment
22 hours ago, Thacobell said:

There's like 3 or 4 different "canons" for these events. All but 1 of them ignores the games. That 1 is the games themselves. Opening up 5e lore, a whole 2 editions later, is just a huge can of worms. Especially with how unpopular 5e's additons tend to be.

I mean, WotC couldn’t move forward with the idea that Gorion’s Ward becomes the new god of death. Honestly, If I were to mod ToB I would probably take that option away. 

Granted, bringing Bhaal back was dumb and unnecessary… but WotC was always clumsy when it comes to Lore, compared to TSR. 

Edited by subtledoctor
Link to comment
2 hours ago, subtledoctor said:

I mean, WotC couldn’t move forward with the idea that Gorion’s Ward becomes the new god of death. Honestly, If I were to mod ToB I would probably take that option away. 

Granted, bringing Bhaal back was dumb and unnecessary… but WotC was always clumsy when it comes to Lore, compared to TSR. 

Trying to go forward with a character who's story is over is a mistake in the first place. It doesn't NEED to go anywhere. The games already start and close it just fine. We don't need the baggage of mediocre at best supplemental material added to them.

Link to comment
44 minutes ago, Thacobell said:

Trying to go forward with a character who's story is over is a mistake in the first place. It doesn't NEED to go anywhere. The games already start and close it just fine. We don't need the baggage of mediocre at best supplemental material added to them.

I don’t follow what you are talking about… what supplemental material? You mean the 5E adventures? Fair enough, but I don’t think that stuff was intended to extend the story of the games. WotC just wanted an evil God of Murder in their setting (for what reason, I don’t know, it’s actually a pretty dumb domain for a deity), so they contrived to bring back Bhaal. 

Edited by subtledoctor
Link to comment
On 2/28/2024 at 10:41 AM, subtledoctor said:

I don’t follow what you are talking about… what supplemental material? You mean the 5E adventures? Fair enough, but I don’t think that stuff was intended to extend the story of the games. WotC just wanted an evil God of Murder in their setting (for what reason, I don’t know, it’s actually a pretty dumb domain for a deity), so they contrived to bring back Bhaal. 

But why use any of that as a base for video game mod 2 whole editions behind? Especially materials as contentious.

Link to comment
1 minute ago, Thacobell said:

But why use any of that as a base for video game mod 2 whole editions behind? Especially materials as contentious.

Technically, BG is 3 editions behind, and I'm honestly thinking you're making much ado about nothing. I encourage you to actually play the mod before continuing commenting over something you haven't played. Then if you dislike something specific Crucible touches on then you can contribute to the discussion from a point of knowledge.

The point of this thread is to raise awareness on the existing lore Crucible drew upon, however briefly, and to point out any inconsistencies if lore is breached. This is not a discussion to say you dislike a certain piece of established lore so therefore Crucible can't touch anything related to it.

Link to comment
3 minutes ago, Thacobell said:

But why use any of that as a base for video game mod 2 whole editions behind? Especially materials as contentious.

I don't think anyone is using that as the "base" for anything. Any mod being made takes place over 100 years before the 5E events, so... a hint or head-nod in its direction is all I would expect to see. (I haven't played Crucible yet, but from the review it sounds like that's what it does.)

But at the end of the day it is canon, so it kind of makes sense to, at least, not pretend it isn't canon.

Spoiler

In the non-existent mod I plotted out in my head, I had a thought that maybe Charname should be shunted into the future and actually make it happen, while undermining the official account. Maybe you have the energy of the god around you and you appear in the BG Ducal Palace, where you are confronted by Duke "Abdel Adrian." Abdel claims to be Gorion's Ward and wields Sarevok's sword and armor and maybe some other artifacts. Of course he is just a pretender, and he attacks you to prevent you from blowing up his deception. And yadda yadda macguffin, something about your fight causes some artifact to rupture and Bhaal to be reborn. The locals recall that a Bhaalspawn disappeared a long time ago and now reappeared and attacked Gorion's Ward, so they mistake you for Viekang and Abdel for you. And so the official WotC is shown to be false, even if the canon end result - Bhaal is around in 5E because the duke was "assassinated" - has to stay the same. Basically to thumb my nose at WotC's canon.

It is, admittedly, a pretty dumb idea for an actual mod. Would be good only for laughs, and even that not so much.

 

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...