D&D General Baldur's Gate 3 Hates Religion (Spoilers)

Incenjucar

Legend
I don't see how that really leads to any problem though. Every setting guide is basically it's own canon, as is every adventure.
Decades of compounded and considered knowledge are not easily overwritten. Someone who has been following the Forgotten Realms for multiple editions is not automatically going to treat it like the Borgotten Bealms because a number changed.
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

Zardnaar

Legend
But the question is, was it explained? I don't believe it was outside of a video game, but I'm open to be corrected on that point.

Not sure. Idk if they fully retconned it out vs not including it in reprints of SCAG.

Storm in tea cup imho. It's their world the wall is consistent with it and it can be done away with easily enough that makes sense in canon (Kelemvor was never that big on it iirc, Myrkul was).
 

Micah Sweet

Level Up & OSR Enthusiast
Not sure. Idk if they fully retconned it out vs not including it in reprints of SCAG.

Storm in tea cup imho. It's their world the wall is consistent with it and it can be done away with easily enough that makes sense in canon (Kelemvor was never that big on it iirc, Myrkul was).
Of course it can be, but whether or not is actually is is the difference between canon and personal preference.that's all I'm saying here.
 

Zardnaar

Legend
Of course it can be, but whether or not is actually is is the difference between canon and personal preference.that's all I'm saying here.

I'm not opposed to change as such but I like worlds to be consistent.

Eg alot of stuff in 4E Darksun could have been added organically to the setting but they went with dynamite and shoehorn approach.
 

What you are saying here is that this consistently across individual products, or editions, doesn't matter to you. That's fine, but please just say that. @Crimson Longinus expressed a preference on this matter and I accept that, even if I don't agree. And again, the number of people who agree with you does not strengthen your argument or make it more than a preference.
You are saying that you wish they would be more strict with a canon. If I don't want that, you are saying that your viewpoint should be taken over my viewpoint.
 


Micah Sweet

Level Up & OSR Enthusiast
You are saying that you wish they would be more strict with a canon. If I don't want that, you are saying that your viewpoint should be taken over my viewpoint.
Since we can't both get what we want, our preferences are in opposition here. Doesn't mean one is more valid than the other though, and I admitted my preference is personal.
 

ECMO3

Hero
Well Viconia hasn't turned from Shar in the 200 or so years since BG2 and I don't think she can be turned in the story either. So there is at least one example of a devout person.
 

Steampunkette

Rules Tinkerer and Freelance Writer
Supporter
Well Viconia hasn't turned from Shar in the 200 or so years since BG2 and I don't think she can be turned in the story either. So there is at least one example of a devout person.
Viconia died just under 100 years ago when she was assassinated with poison taken directly from Lolth's fangs while her spouse and their son lived on in her memory.

The other ending, where she tries to set up a Sharran Enclave which collapses into infighting and drives her to fight alongside Drizzt Do'urden and gain the highest honor of the Seldarine doesn't count!
 

You do know that's not what "canon" means right?
Yes. it's the generally accepted body of lore.
Something is "canon" when it is accepted as part of an official, fictional universe.
If people accept BG3, it is canon.
You are re-defining the term to suit your own purposes.
I don't need to, it already comes with lots of different definitions. None of which are authoritative outside of a religious context. The dictionary calls it's usage in this context "slang". There is no canon definition of canon.
The people who control a property get to decide what is canon and what isn't. The people who interact with a property get to decide what they like and what they don't. That's it. Head-canon, despite the name, isn't actually canon.
The IP owners have no obligation to say anything about canon, and if they do the fans are under no obligation to accept it.
 
Last edited:

Remove ads

AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Remove ads

Upcoming Releases

Top