Drow Lore not matching previous BG games

[Pelican-1]

I was playing BG2 to pass the time waiting for BG3 to release and I came across some dialogue with Viconia, the Drow. She states "The drow wish to rule, as do duergar, kuo-toa... even illithids, but our feet are clay. We distrust each other almost more than other races...."
Then it was proven right in front of me, when a Drow priestess murdered another Drow over a slave- she claimed he was easier to replace than a trained slave as the male drow was begging not to be killed. the priestess states that she has "other sons" and murders him outright.

Then I recall that my character in BG3 was of the Drow(female), and NOT of the lolth-kind.

While I was freeing the male Drow from the rubble in BG3 (where the duergar/forge is located) the drow was actually furious with the duergar for not being fast enough in freeing him from the rubble, and when he spoke to me I had drow options for dialogue. When chosen, he had 0 issues with me and wanted to help my situation.

This might be a small issue for most of you guys but from my understanding of BG lore, both male and female drow despise and often kill each other for little to no reason, specially the female drow having no remorse for the males, like a spider after mating, would kill the male drow with no hesitation.

According to BG1 and 2 lore, the part in BG3 when I freed the male drow from the rubble (Nere), me being a drow and a female at that, this "Nere" would have been 100% paranoid OR simply hostile towards my kind or possibly kill on sight. Instead the game has me pick his side or the side of the duergar. "After a conflictive conversation between Nere and Brithvar, you will have to choose a side between them.". There wouldn't be a side to choose according to BG2 and what happens in the underdark with Viconia in your party.

This was one of my main concerns with BG3, how much did they actually know of BG1 and 2 lore to keep the story concrete? Hopefully it can be addressed. Lore is everything.. without lore, your game/any game is aimless.

[Lord Adorable]

Oh man, these Drow threads always end well.
No matter, I,ll still play my Lolth-Drow Cleric and he's gonna be awesome.

[otakon17]

Originally posted by booger_911:

Originally posted by Ghost:

Not seeing the problem here? The Drow are a matriarchal society, the men little better than slaves. The males are subservient, or else.

They still see themselves superior to the other Underdark races such as the Duergar.

*Also the lore has changed somewhat over the 20 years, and WotC took the nuclear option for lore/canon.

My drow is female, and Nere is male XD I should have been kill on sight. period.
especially that Im not of the Lolth.

Ah but Nere doesn't know that. All he sees is a lady Drow helping him then asking him questions. Unless you correct him. Similar situation pops up earlier in the game when you run across a dying "True Soul". Unless you tell his companions specifically, they believe you to be another "True Soul".

[zero]

Originally posted by booger_911:

If you want to argue with me about it, don't waste your time plz

then dont make a thread, you asked a question, this is your answer, you both do not understand the lore and also think its not D&D lore thats gonna be used.

[Pelican-1]

Originally posted by zero:

Originally posted by booger_911:

It just sucks is all.. it's not lore from DnD, it's the Lore of Baldur's Gate 1 and 2 that were altered out of the blue- just because 5e is a thing.. That's like if 5e changed something about the children of Bhaal to be of a specific race, but then we can all remember in BG1 and 2, you WERE a child of Bhaal yet could have any race when selecting your character y'know. it just a foul ball is all.. Like I said, it's not game breaking but it's certainly not a good "thing"

baldurs gate 1 and 2 used the lore of D&D, cause it was and always has been a D&D game licensed by wizzy coast.

drow have not changed much in the scheme of things, especially not the specific group you are talking about, your context of your question completely ignores the enviroment in which its happening in lol.

its been 20 years, they have smoothed out some rough edges, to no surprise.

Well to give a bit of context, the environment doesn't matter, the drow are still hated and heated amongst themselves and they worship the same deities. every drow dialogue option in BG3 so far has been a telling of that lore that is still in bg1 and 2. I feel like in BG3 they should keep to the lore that was paved already, it's not been long enough for something like that to be so dramatically different where a male lolth drow would want to be happy friendly with my character, being that of a female drow and not a child of lolth. like I said, it was like it wasn't even a thing when in dialogue with nere.

Simply put, Larian dropped the ball a bit. not shaming, just saying.

[Ephemerant]

Originally posted by booger_911:

Originally posted by zero:

baldurs gate 1 and 2 used the lore of D&D, cause it was and always has been a D&D game licensed by wizzy coast.

drow have not changed much in the scheme of things, especially not the specific group you are talking about, your context of your question completely ignores the enviroment in which its happening in lol.

its been 20 years, they have smoothed out some rough edges, to no surprise.

Well to give a bit of context, the environment doesn't matter, the drow are still hated and heated amongst themselves and they worship the same deities. every drow dialogue option in BG3 so far has been a telling of that lore that is still in bg1 and 2. I feel like in BG3 they should keep to the lore that was paved already, it's not been long enough for something like that to be so dramatically different where a male lolth drow would want to be happy friendly with my character, being that of a female drow and not a child of lolth. like I said, it was like it wasn't even a thing when in dialogue with nere.

Simply put, Larian dropped the ball a bit. not shaming, just saying.

Simply put, your understanding of the lore is flawed. Not shaming, just saying.

[Pelican-1]

Originally posted by zero:

Originally posted by booger_911:

If you want to argue with me about it, don't waste your time plz

then dont make a thread, you asked a question, this is your answer, you both do not understand the lore and also think its not D&D lore thats gonna be used.

Nah this was a generality. Im basically saying don't argue with me cause so far everyone who has, have been wrong about the lore, and try to make it make sense lol it's not gonna work is what I'm saying.

[zero]

Originally posted by booger_911:

Originally posted by zero:

baldurs gate 1 and 2 used the lore of D&D, cause it was and always has been a D&D game licensed by wizzy coast.

drow have not changed much in the scheme of things, especially not the specific group you are talking about, your context of your question completely ignores the enviroment in which its happening in lol.

its been 20 years, they have smoothed out some rough edges, to no surprise.

Well to give a bit of context, the environment doesn't matter, the drow are still hated and heated amongst themselves and they worship the same deities. every drow dialogue option in BG3 so far has been a telling of that lore that is still in bg1 and 2. I feel like in BG3 they should keep to the lore that was paved already, it's not been long enough for something like that to be so dramatically different where a male lolth drow would want to be happy friendly with my character, being that of a female drow and not a child of lolth. like I said, it was like it wasn't even a thing when in dialogue with nere.

Simply put, Larian dropped the ball a bit. not shaming, just saying.

this is the lore they paved my dude, you just dislike it, but its been this way for literal decades.

it doesn't even dismiss the old system, its still entirely in place, you just assume that drow are murder hobos when the reality is they do things for their gain, not on a whim.

the way events play out, which is the enviorment plays a major role in events, the context matters, obviously, trying to pretend otherwise is silly.

simply put: its wizzy coast rules, not larians, good try though

[Harukage]

Originally posted by booger_911:

You do know they have different eyes right? lol not to mention tone of flesh, and their auras can be sensed.. but hey.. what do I know. XD

And isn't that just Larian invention?
TBH i do not remember any Lolth worshiping underdrow having the same red eyes. All of them had different eye colour. And they were virtually no different visualy from those udadrow who worship Eiilstraee or Vhaeraun.
If you want "different" drow (visualy) you need to look at other settings like Ebberon. Or seek very rare and ellusive groups of drow of FR who denounced Lolth even earlier and never went to the Underdark, like Aevendrow who live far north of the Ice Wind Dale, or Lorendrow far, far, very far south of the Swords Coast.
Also yes, OP somehow seriously misunderstood drow.

[Pelican-1]

Originally posted by Ephemerant:

Originally posted by booger_911:

Well to give a bit of context, the environment doesn't matter, the drow are still hated and heated amongst themselves and they worship the same deities. every drow dialogue option in BG3 so far has been a telling of that lore that is still in bg1 and 2. I feel like in BG3 they should keep to the lore that was paved already, it's not been long enough for something like that to be so dramatically different where a male lolth drow would want to be happy friendly with my character, being that of a female drow and not a child of lolth. like I said, it was like it wasn't even a thing when in dialogue with nere.

Simply put, Larian dropped the ball a bit. not shaming, just saying.

Simply put, your understanding of the lore is flawed. Not shaming, just saying.

see lolol you just wanna argue tf?

Anyways, Larian dropped the ball, that's the conclusion.

[Ephemerant]

Originally posted by booger_911:

Originally posted by Ephemerant:

Simply put, your understanding of the lore is flawed. Not shaming, just saying.

see lolol you just wanna argue tf?

Anyways, Larian dropped the ball, that's the conclusion.

You keep acting like you're an authority on the subject when you're clearly not. You're dunking on the game because of your own misunderstanding of the lore. "bUt ThEy HaVe dIfErEnT eYeS!" They have a COMMON eye color, but others are possible. There's been 120 years of world shaking events for the Drow, which could also cause changes that deviate from your misconceptions.

[Pelican-1]

Originally posted by zero:

Originally posted by booger_911:

Well to give a bit of context, the environment doesn't matter, the drow are still hated and heated amongst themselves and they worship the same deities. every drow dialogue option in BG3 so far has been a telling of that lore that is still in bg1 and 2. I feel like in BG3 they should keep to the lore that was paved already, it's not been long enough for something like that to be so dramatically different where a male lolth drow would want to be happy friendly with my character, being that of a female drow and not a child of lolth. like I said, it was like it wasn't even a thing when in dialogue with nere.

Simply put, Larian dropped the ball a bit. not shaming, just saying.

this is the lore they paved my dude, you just dislike it, but its been this way for literal decades.

it doesn't even dismiss the old system, its still entirely in place, you just assume that drow are murder hobos when the reality is they do things for their gain, not on a whim.

Don't assume I'm ignorant to this lore of BG.
Otherwise how would I have a drow in my party at all? I get it.. but it doesn't match the lore that was already paved in BG1 and 2.

Like I stated before, that's like saying the "children of Bhaal lore", can be altered as such: in BG1 and 2 you can make any race, but you're a child of Bhaal. Well in 6e Bhaal can only have Halflings as their true race... welp, looks like it's time to change the lore of BG1 and 2 instead of keeping it in tact in BG3.. (totally hypothetical) but you see what I'm getting at? Hopefully lol

[zero]

Originally posted by Ephemerant:

Originally posted by booger_911:

see lolol you just wanna argue tf?

Anyways, Larian dropped the ball, that's the conclusion.

You keep acting like you're an authority on the subject when you're clearly not. You're dunking on the game because of your own misunderstanding of the lore. "bUt ThEy HaVe dIfErEnT eYeS!" They have a COMMON eye color, but others are possible. There's been 120 years of world shaking events for the Drow, which could also cause changes that deviate from your misconceptions.

it's not like theres a million supplimental content over the past 2 decades showing more or less everything you need to know

Originally posted by booger_911:

Originally posted by zero:

this is the lore they paved my dude, you just dislike it, but its been this way for literal decades.

it doesn't even dismiss the old system, its still entirely in place, you just assume that drow are murder hobos when the reality is they do things for their gain, not on a whim.

Don't assume I'm ignorant to this lore of BG.
Otherwise how would I have a drow in my party at all? I get it.. but it doesn't match the lore that was already paved in BG1 and 2.

Like I stated before, that's like saying the "children of Bhaal lore", can be altered as such: in BG1 and 2 you can make any race, but you're a child of Bhaal. Well in 6e Bhaal can only have Halflings as their true race... welp, looks like it's time to change the lore of BG1 and 2 instead of keeping it in tact in BG3.. (totally hypothetical) but you see what I'm getting at? Hopefully lol

except you are misconstruing what you think the lore is my dude lol.

the drow didn't suddenly change their disposition (they hardly changed that as is), time has passed, and plenty of events which you can, you know, read or experience for yourself has happened.

D&D has had over 20 years of content since bg2, if your ignorant of it you are ignorant of it, it happens.

[Ephemerant]

Originally posted by zero:

Originally posted by Ephemerant:

You keep acting like you're an authority on the subject when you're clearly not. You're dunking on the game because of your own misunderstanding of the lore. "bUt ThEy HaVe dIfErEnT eYeS!" They have a COMMON eye color, but others are possible. There's been 120 years of world shaking events for the Drow, which could also cause changes that deviate from your misconceptions.

it's not like theres a million supplimental content over the past 2 decades showing more or less everything you need to know

Exactly

[Ghost]

Originally posted by booger_911:

Don't assume I'm ignorant to this lore of BG.
Otherwise how would I have a drow in my party at all? I get it.. but it doesn't match the lore that was already paved in BG1 and 2.

Like I stated before, that's like saying the "children of Bhaal lore", can be altered as such: in BG1 and 2 you can make any race, but you're a child of Bhaal. Well in 6e Bhaal can only have Halflings as their true race... welp, looks like it's time to change the lore of BG1 and 2 instead of keeping it in tact in BG3.. (totally hypothetical) but you see what I'm getting at? Hopefully lol

You're taking 1 scene as a whole representation while also completely ignoring the context of said scene. There are others in the game that sound much closer to what you were expecting - including the rampant paranoia, the seething hate, and the killing after sex.

[King of Scrubz]

"Lore is for Nerds"- Pete Hines