So what are the chances this game uses BG1 and BG2 story as backstory and not the book?

[sleeper]

It seems for now they use the books but in the books Jaheira dies so maybe not. What do you all think?

[dulany67]

Seems to be a combo.

[Ghost]

Neither the games or the book are technically considered canon by WotC - but I'd say leaning far more towards the games. The novelization was pretty poor. Keep in mind that BG3 is set 100+ years after the previous, it's old history.

[Jon]

There really doesn't appear to be any form of backstory, tbh. Its just existing in the same world, as far as backstory goes.

[Razorblade]

BG3 is largely based on the 5E modules "Murder in Baldur's Gate" and "Baldur's Gate: Descent Into Avernus."

The modules borrow from the BG novelizations and Misnc comics, but only a bit. E.g. the Bhaalspawn (protagonist) was a human named Abdel Adrian who did not achieve godhood. Anything not strictly mentioned in a 5E tabletop module is not considered absolute canon to BG3, and is open to be "changed" at-will by the devs (hence why we see Jaheira alive).

The important part of Murder in Baldur's Gate, which is not part of the novelization at all, is that Abdel Adrian goes on to lead the Flaming Fist and become Duke of Baldur's Gate, living to about 150 due to his Bhaalspawn nature, before duelling the last Bhaalspawn to the death, thereby completing Bhaal's soul and resurrecting him.

Descent Into Avernus, meanwhile, tells us that Minsc was petrified and then unpetrified in the modern day, Baldur's Gate's rival city Elturel was dragged into Avernus by the Archdevil Zariel, and that Baldur's Gate is having a big problem with Dead Three cultists (one of the Dead Three gods being the resurrected Bhaal).

These are pretty much the canon events you need to know going into Baldur's Gate 3. It is also worth noting that, as non-tabletop, non-5E content, BG1 and BG2 aren't necessarily canon to their own sequel, ironically. We can assume most events happened as they did in the games unless directly contradicted by tabletop canon, but the developers more or less have a blank check to rewrite history, if they wish.

[sleeper]

Originally posted by Ghost:

Neither the games or the book are technically considered canon by WotC - but I'd say leaning far more towards the games. The novelization was pretty poor. Keep in mind that BG3 is set 100+ years after the previous, it's old history.

yes but its BG3 this not BG the adventure of the merry party. So I have to think connection to the other games story wise there is.

[Mr.Hmm]

Baldurs Gate 3 is roughly 124 years after the events of Baldurs Gate 2.

https://forums.larian.com/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=725782#Post725782

[sleeper]

I hate blank checks they should with confides of established lore and history not modify however they want to suit their needs. Creativity is better when it does not break great things but makes other great things in confides of those great walls.

[Ghost]

Originally posted by sleeper:

Originally posted by Ghost:

Neither the games or the book are technically considered canon by WotC - but I'd say leaning far more towards the games. The novelization was pretty poor. Keep in mind that BG3 is set 100+ years after the previous, it's old history.

yes but its BG3 this not BG the adventure of the merry party. So I have to think connection to the other games story wise there is.

The connections are there, events are mentioned, some of the characters are still around and can be recruited as companions, the dead 3 are back and in Baldur's Gate etc.

It's just that WotC took the nuclear option to free themselves to do whatever they want, so some things were retconned; it's still somewhat unknown how much influence they and their lore decisions will have on the game, especially considering they've declared the games themselves non-canon.