Baldur's Gate 3 II: The Urge for a Second Playthrough

[Psyren]

But Gale would also know that this knowledge is not widespread, so he wouldn't just casually drop it in conversation as justification.

To reiterate, we haven't seen any evidence that it is even "widespread." A Sharran Justiciar inner circle, and Gale of Waterdeep blabbing to his friends, are not going to turn the cosmology on its head.

And even if the layperson knows "Ao is the reason gods don't intervene with mortal affairs directly" - flocking to worship him/them en masse doesn't necessarily follow from that. "Ao" in that context might as well be a concept or an agreement between the gods for all they know, rather than an entity.

Hah. What's Ao going to do, erase everything as punishment? Oops.

If he were really going to do that, Shar should be shouting his name from the rooftops - oblivion is her ultimate goal after all.

[Cikomyr2]

Hah. What's Ao going to do, erase everything as punishment? Oops.

I mean, yes exactly.

In a way, Shar provoking Ao by disregarding his instruction and forcing his hand in doing "resets" both fit with her personality and divine Agenda, so i do not even think Ao can call her out on that. She is doing what she is meant to be: driving hard toward nihilistic pursuit.

[diplomancer]

Hah. What's Ao going to do, erase everything as punishment? Oops.

He will create more and more worlds as punishment. And they will be happy. HAPPY, you see. Take that, you nihilistic freak!

[Psyren]

He will create more and more worlds as punishment. And they will be happy. HAPPY, you see. Take that, you nihilistic freak!

And they'll all be brightly lit at least half the time

I mean, yes exactly.

In a way, Shar provoking Ao by disregarding his instruction and forcing his hand in doing "resets" both fit with her personality and divine Agenda, so i do not even think Ao can call her out on that. She is doing what she is meant to be: driving hard toward nihilistic pursuit.

Well to play devil's advocate - it's against her agenda if his existence is supposed to be some cosmic secret. Revealing secrets hither and yon/writing them down in plaintext Common for any yaybo to trip over decades later rather than hoarding them isn't Shar's thing, that's Deneir or Oghma.

Ultimately what it boils down to narratively is that it's more fun to write about/introduce the slew of new FR audiences to Ao than it isn't (Doylist), plus it conveniently answers the typical "if the existing major deities know about this Absolute threat why don't they just snap their fingers and deal with it" (Watsonian) question.

[Zevox]

I'm not denying how the old rule worked; but yet, now that they are name-dropping him, we see no evidence of any such cults resurging. Keep in mind the texts name-dropping him go back at least 100 years (as that's when Ketheric was an active Sharran.) Ao had plenty of time to get the magic eraser out if he were so inclined.

Right, we're not disagreeing about what the game has happening. What I'm arguing is that this does not fit with the existing lore of the setting, and the likely explanation is simply that the developers were unaware of this small detail of how the setting handles Ao.

Moreover, the namedropping is, once again, confined to folks who already have a patron. I don't see a bunch of practicing Sharrans or Mystrans jumping ship to Ao.

Most people in the setting have a patron already, and conversions are definitely a thing that happens. More importantly though, that's irrelevant. Once word of the existence of an overgod that created the first gods gets out, there will be people who choose to start worshiping him. That's just a logical result of that, and one that has already happened before.

Chosen are mortal, yes; those two individuals are not.

Yes, they are. Elminster has a greatly extended lifespan, but is still very much human. Ketheric was stealing another being's immortality to obtain physical immortality for a time (a time after the point that's relevant to this discussion, I might add), but was otherwise still just an empowered half-elf.

There are chosen who have transcended mortality, such as Malik el Sami, Cyric's Seraph of Lies, or Drasek Riven, Mask's chosen who obtained a piece of Mask's divinity that had been stolen from him and became a demi-god in his own right. But Elminster and Ketheric are not among them.

More importantly though, this line of questioning was raised because Ao wiped knowledge of his existence from mortal memory and records. Technically, it's not specific if that extended beyond mortals, but with the goal being to keep mortals from knowing he exists, it would make the most sense if it extended to everyone besides the gods, whom need to know of his existence since they answer to him. It does him no good if mortals can learn of him just from bargaining with a devil for forbidden knowledge or the like, something some will be willing to do. So I don't think that even transcending mortality in the way that, say, Malik did would necessarily matter to the point. Becoming a demi-god like Riven would, but I'm pretty sure only Mask's Chosen have ever done that, and it only stuck with Riven.

He was definitely a Chosen of Shar prior to jumping ship to Myrkul.

Based on what? Nothing in BG3 refers to him as such. He was certainly a leader among Shar's faithful at one point, but if all such leaders were Chosen, there would be a hell of a lot more Chosen in the Realms' history.

As for Shar, i can see Lady Shar flaunting Ao's instructions. Since her worships is centered around her people solely devoting to her will for nihilistic purposes.

Hah. What's Ao going to do, erase everything as punishment? Oops.

I mean, yes exactly.

In a way, Shar provoking Ao by disregarding his instruction and forcing his hand in doing "resets" both fit with her personality and divine Agenda, so i do not even think Ao can call her out on that. She is doing what she is meant to be: driving hard toward nihilistic pursuit.

The last time some of the gods did something against his rules, Ao cast them all out of the heavens and forced them into avatar form on Toril, precipitating a crisis in which multiple gods, including all of those that had defied Ao, were killed and replaced. Pretty sure even Shar would fear that, and know not to test Ao's patience. Her own demise would gain her nothing.

[Psyren]

Right, we're not disagreeing about what the game has happening. What I'm arguing is that this does not fit with the existing lore of the setting, and the likely explanation is simply that the developers were unaware of this small detail of how the setting handles Ao.

Or... they (rightly) didn't care, because Tradition is not sufficient reason to rigidly adhere to one specific permutation of the "lore."

Most people in the setting have a patron already, and conversions are definitely a thing that happens. More importantly though, that's irrelevant. Once word of the existence of an overgod that created the first gods gets out, there will be people who choose to start worshiping him. That's just a logical result of that, and one that has already happened before.

But not now. The reason why not this time is similarly irrelevant (though I've proposed several theories.)

Based on what? Nothing in BG3 refers to him as such.

I definitely saw reference to him as such, if I come across it again I'll be sure to post it. The FR Wiki has him as one too.

[Zevox]

Or... they (rightly) didn't care, because Tradition is not sufficient reason to rigidly adhere to one specific permutation of the "lore."

Logic is, though. The previous way he was handled made sense. Just abruptly ceasing to handle him that way with no explanation doesn't. More likely, they didn't know, because it is an obscure detail about a figure that, aside from a single specific event, is a largely an irrelevant piece of background lore, since he doesn't directly intervene in the world's goings-on.

But not now. The reason why not this time is similarly irrelevant (though I've proposed several theories.)

The reason most certainly would be relevant, as otherwise they've just done something that is completely inconsistent with the setting as we know it. Again, makes sense if they just didn't know and it was a simple mistake, doesn't if they did and actively chose to ignore it.

I definitely saw reference to him as such, if I come across it again I'll be sure to post it. The FR Wiki has him as one too.

The FR wiki also lists him only as a Chosen of Myrkul on the "Chosen" page, with the only Chosen of Shar being listed as Telamont Tanthul.

[Psyren]

Just abruptly ceasing to handle him that way with no explanation doesn't. More likely, they didn't know, because it is an obscure detail about a figure that, aside from a single specific event, is a largely an irrelevant piece of background lore, since he doesn't directly intervene in the world's goings-on.

The reason most certainly would be relevant, as otherwise they've just done something that is completely inconsistent with the setting as we know it. Again, makes sense if they just didn't know and it was a simple mistake, doesn't if they did and actively chose to ignore it.

1) Of course it makes sense to ignore it 5e has been the source of the biggest influx of brand new D&D players in decades if not ever, and Baldurs Gate 3 was poised to increase that even further (for players who either prefer videogames, can't get a tabletop group, or both.) Ao's existence underpins the entire Baldur's Gate franchise, because he's the reason we even have Bhaalspawn in the first place. You can't explain the Time of Troubles without referencing him, and expecting everyone who plays this game to check an external wiki or buy Faiths and Pantheons or something isn't logical.

2) Declaring "Larian just doesn't understand FR lore enough, this can only have been an accident" is a premise with absolutely no basis. Every piece of evidence we have is that they are very knowledgeable about the Realms in general and Baldurs Gate in specific.

The FR wiki also lists him only as a Chosen of Myrkul on the "Chosen" page, with the only Chosen of Shar being listed as Telamont Tanthul.

His page lists him as having become Shar's Chosen, in the "History" section.

Logic is, though. The previous way he was handled made sense.

Logic depends on sound premises. If those premises are wrong, perfect logic will still lead you to incorrect conclusions.

Your premise, that Ao ceasing to obliviate everyone who learns of him or writes about him leads to the other gods being abandoned or whatever other negative consequences for the setting, does not have to be invariably true, nor is there evidence for it within BG3 itself.

[Zevox]

1) Of course it makes sense to ignore it 5e has been the source of the biggest influx of brand new D&D players in decades if not ever, and Baldurs Gate 3 was poised to increase that even further (for players who either prefer videogames, can't get a tabletop group, or both.) Ao's existence underpins the entire Baldur's Gate franchise, because he's the reason we even have Bhaalspawn in the first place. You can't explain the Time of Troubles without referencing him, and expecting everyone who plays this game to check an external wiki or buy Faiths and Pantheons or something isn't logical.

They didn't bring him up to explain the Time of Troubles, though. He's brought casually in lore bits about Shar and Selûne, and in a conversation about Mystra. The Time of Troubles is hardly even mentioned. As it shouldn't be, because it's largely irrelevant to the events of this game, despite the Dead Three's involvement.

And even if the Time of Troubles did need to be explained, you can do so without bringing up Ao, you just need to state that its ultimate cause was a mystery. Which it would be, to everyone in the setting besides the gods. All that matters about it is that it was a time where the gods walked the world in avatar form, several were killed during it, and several new ones ascended at the end of it. Simple, one-sentence explanation, done.

2) Declaring "Larian just doesn't understand FR lore enough, this can only have been an accident" is a premise with absolutely no basis. Every piece of evidence we have is that they are very knowledgeable about the Realms in general and Baldurs Gate in specific.

I'm declaring nothing; I'm offering them to the benefit of the doubt, because that makes more sense than that they did this deliberately. Especially given what a minor thing it ultimately is.

His page lists him as having become Shar's Chosen, in the "History" section.

And the Chosen page, which has a large list of all the Chosen, doesn't include him as one of Shar's Chosen, only Myrkul's. And that page definitely has numerous ex-Chosen on it, with plenty of dead ones on the list.

Logic depends on sound premises. If those premises are wrong, perfect logic will still lead you to incorrect conclusions.

Your premise, that Ao ceasing to obliviate everyone who learns of him or writes about him leads to the other gods being abandoned or whatever other negative consequences for the setting, does not have to be invariably true, nor is there evidence for it within BG3 itself.

It does though. He's an entity above even the gods themselves - that will attract people who wish to worship him, inevitably. Whether because of his power, him being the ultimate creator of their universe and thus themselves, him simply being someone above even the gods, or for any number of other reasons. That is indeed inevitable, if knowledge of him were commonplace. To ignore it and pretend that wouldn't happen would make no sense. And they did not, there was an explanation about it.

If this was deliberate, and they are now ignoring this issue, then it does not make sense. They are introducing a problem where previously there was none, for no reason. That seems ridiculous, and I give them more credit as writers than that, hence my assumption that they didn't know.

[Psyren]

They didn't bring him up to explain the Time of Troubles, though. He's brought casually in lore bits about Shar and Selûne, and in a conversation about Mystra.

That information is valid too. "Gods are overt, we can even meet them in this game, why don't they solve it" is answered by "Ao." Thus mentioning him makes sense.

The Time of Troubles is hardly even mentioned. As it shouldn't be, because it's largely irrelevant to the events of this game, despite the Dead Three's involvement.

It's very relevant. No ToT, no Bhaalspawn, no plot.

I'm declaring nothing; I'm offering them to the benefit of the doubt, because that makes more sense than that they did this deliberately. Especially given what a minor thing it ultimately is.

"They must not know what they're doing" is a very weird way of giving them the benefit of the doubt.

What I think is that you're so opposed to changing lore that you'd rather they be incompetent.

And the Chosen page, which has a large list of all the Chosen, doesn't include him as one of Shar's Chosen, only Myrkul's. And that page definitely has numerous ex-Chosen on it, with plenty of dead ones on the list.

Feel free to start an edit war then. As I said, when I come across the info in game I'll screenshot it.

[Cikomyr2]

Eh. Just because the ToT kickstarted the backstory of the first games doesn't mean it is relevant to this game's plot. Netheril's Fall is more relevant, for example.

[Psyren]

Here you go Zevox, saved you an edit war:



Found in the Last Light Inn.

[Spore]

Here you go Zevox, saved you an edit war:

[img.]https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/945934606056685591/1163649562012028938/CroppedIWasRight.png?ex=6540581b&is=652de31b&hm=b0 06603f604c3bfdea324241aca4948b7c22d8492ee419b9f2f6 1b413422bf9c&[/img]

Found in the Last Light Inn.

Am I the only one that finds neatly lined up writing in the most generic font on a vellum a bit weird and immersion breaking? I may be expecting entirely too much but can I just SOME SORT of fantasy font?

I still cannot believe I am praising a Bethesda product on immersion.

[Anonymouswizard]

Am I the only one that finds neatly lined up writing in the most generic font on a vellum a bit weird and immersion breaking? I may be expecting entirely too much but can I just SOME SORT of fantasy font?

I still cannot believe I am praising a Bethesda product on immersion.

I'd argue for accessibility, but honestly? An optional cursive font switch would be nice.

[Aragehaor]

Assuming for a moment that Ao being name dropped was 100% intentional, Does this random change to the lore add anything to the game? would the absence of the precious few lines that reference Ao have negatively affected the game in any way?

I would argue that no, it would not, and that if Larian deliberately chose to ignore that small bit of the setting just for the funzies then it was a small mistake, as for existing fans it has a high chance to detract from the game (however minorly or majorly) whereas new players ignorant of the settings lore would be unlikely to care at all either way.

I cannot actually imagine a scenario in which Ao is even helpful to mention to a new player, as deeply irrelevant as he is in all of the settings plots that do not directly involve him.
If the game intended to feature any real lore whatsoever on the time of troubles, then i might argue differently, but to my knowledge it does not.


Personally, while i think Larian did a rather excellent job all things considered, given that they demonstrably have made numerous errors* in the game itself, i find it somewhat bizarre that anyone would find the mere idea that this was an error preposterous.



*(Saverok being another albeit more debatable Lore error.)

[Errorname]

Am I the only one that finds neatly lined up writing in the most generic font on a vellum a bit weird and immersion breaking? I may be expecting entirely too much but can I just SOME SORT of fantasy font?

I still cannot believe I am praising a Bethesda product on immersion.

Look we can't all be Pentiment

[Psyren]

I've reached Moonrise and I can confirm that the "Minthara Good Recruitment mod" works like a charm. I found her on trial primarily for failing to recover the prism, and nobody mentioned anything about her destroying the grove, so my playthrough appears to be seamless so far.

What I found interesting is that, upon smuggling her out (leaping from the battlements with Feather Fall meant only talking my way past a single guard) and reaching my camp, she has quite a bit of dialogue about Wyll and Karlach - two characters that are supposed to be mutually exclusive with her. Was she planned at one point to recruitable in any playthrough, and if so, what made Larian change that? I'm really hoping that they make her available in a good playthrough. She has a fascinating amount of lore (including her experiences on having been a Lolthite Paladin) and a unique perspective on the main conflict.

I'd argue for accessibility,

This is my assumption as well.

*(Saverok being another albeit more debatable Lore error.)

Very debatable I'd say.

[BRC]

I've reached Moonrise and I can confirm that the "Minthara Good Recruitment mod" works like a charm. I found her on trial primarily for failing to recover the prism, and nobody mentioned anything about her destroying the grove, so my playthrough appears to be seamless so far.

What I found interesting is that, upon smuggling her out (leaping from the battlements with Feather Fall meant only talking my way past a single guard) and reaching my camp, she has quite a bit of dialogue about Wyll and Karlach - two characters that are supposed to be mutually exclusive with her. Was she planned at one point to recruitable in any playthrough, and if so, what made Larian change that? I'm really hoping that they make her available in a good playthrough. She has a fascinating amount of lore (including her experiences on having been a Lolthite Paladin) and a unique perspective on the main conflict.

That's my guess. A whole character is a LOT of content to gate behind a cartoonishly evil playthrough.

My guess is that originally she was intended to be recruit able so long as you didn't kill her in Act 1, by knocking her out or what have you. Then, at some point, Larian decided they wanted to provide SOME support for an Evil/Absolutist playthrough, so they awkwardly switched to have her be only recruit able by people who slaughtered the grove in order to give some payout for players who took that route, without neccessarily committing to building out an entire Parallel campaign for genuinely joining the cult.

[Psyren]

That's my guess. A whole character is a LOT of content to gate behind a cartoonishly evil playthrough.

My guess is that originally she was intended to be recruit able so long as you didn't kill her in Act 1, by knocking her out or what have you. Then, at some point, Larian decided they wanted to provide SOME support for an Evil/Absolutist playthrough, so they awkwardly switched to have her be only recruit able by people who slaughtered the grove in order to give some payout for players who took that route, without neccessarily committing to building out an entire Parallel campaign for genuinely joining the cult.

It's legitimately ridiculous/infuriating. I could understand it if she was a complete jerk/unrepentant murderer with no redeeming value, like Morinth from Mass Effect 2 or something, but she's not that at all. She's actually a good (well, amenable anyway) victim of the Absolute with surprising amounts of depth, who did her best to survive without having the protection we all take for granted. Even right after meeting her, she expresses remorse for the brutal acts the Absolute made her perform.

I saw some clips with her from the endgame and

Spoiler: Origin Karlach Epilogue

Show

if you romance her as Karlach, she takes her fulfilled Oath of Vengeance against the Absolute and aims it squarely at Zariel instead, promising of her own free will to go with you to Avernus and help you destroy the archdevil for what she's done to you or die trying, just so she can be with you. She's even more gung-ho about it than Wyll!

I feel positively cheated. So I'm going to cheat right back.


***EDIT*** for the "mindflayer souls" discussion, we just got this gem from Ed Greenwood himself, linked in another thread:

[BRC]

It's also possible that they've built a narrative where many enemy leaders, the True Souls, are largely victims of mind control separated from the PC and their companions only by chance. This is clear in the "Good" playthrough canon where the Prism stops you from falling under the Absolute's control, but it's not really pushed front and center the way it is with Minthara.


Maybe they decided to let people do the default "Good" playthrough where that particular fact is more ignorable.

[GloatingSwine]

That's my guess. A whole character is a LOT of content to gate behind a cartoonishly evil playthrough.

My guess is that originally she was intended to be recruit able so long as you didn't kill her in Act 1, by knocking her out or what have you. Then, at some point, Larian decided they wanted to provide SOME support for an Evil/Absolutist playthrough, so they awkwardly switched to have her be only recruit able by people who slaughtered the grove in order to give some payout for players who took that route, without neccessarily committing to building out an entire Parallel campaign for genuinely joining the cult.

There is a way to recruit Minathra, it's probably not intended and it's very silly*.

Spoiler

Show

1. Engage her in combat and knock her out, kill the other goblin leaders.
2. Reach the fast travel point at Moonrise Towers.
3. Return to Minathra and Polymorph her into a sheep, cast Dominate Beast so she follows you.
4. Select Sheepathra and fast travel to Moonrise Towers.
5. Have a sufficiently strong character pick up Sheepathra as an Improvised Weapon and carry her into Ketheric Thorm's room and put her down.
   
   The game will now trigger the judgement scene and you will be able to recruit her.

* Which doesn't preclude it being intentional for Larian, but it's a bit too fiddly for that.

[Psyren]

There is a way to recruit Minathra, it's probably not intended and it's very silly*.

Spoiler

Show

1. Engage her in combat and knock her out, kill the other goblin leaders.
2. Reach the fast travel point at Moonrise Towers.
3. Return to Minathra and Polymorph her into a sheep, cast Dominate Beast so she follows you.
4. Select Sheepathra and fast travel to Moonrise Towers.
5. Have a sufficiently strong character pick up Sheepathra as an Improvised Weapon and carry her into Ketheric Thorm's room and put her down.
   
   The game will now trigger the judgement scene and you will be able to recruit her.

* Which doesn't preclude it being intentional for Larian, but it's a bit too fiddly for that.

Yep, I saw that. Poor console players

It's also possible that they've built a narrative where many enemy leaders, the True Souls, are largely victims of mind control separated from the PC and their companions only by chance. This is clear in the "Good" playthrough canon where the Prism stops you from falling under the Absolute's control, but it's not really pushed front and center the way it is with Minthara.


Maybe they decided to let people do the default "Good" playthrough where that particular fact is more ignorable.

It's chance to an extent. The Tav Crew was definitely chance - each of them ended up on the Guardian's nautiloid, and got implanted, for very different reasons. But the Moonrise True Souls all went there willingly IIRC, albeit being duped and having falsified memories implanted once they got there.

[diplomancer]

Has anyone figured out if there is a way to use Pact Magic slots for Sorcery Points before you've used up your Spellcasting slots of the same level?

[LCP]

Then, at some point, Larian decided they wanted to provide SOME support for an Evil/Absolutist playthrough,

I feel like half the problem with the 'evil' choices in the game is that there's not enough distinction between 'evil' and 'joining the Absolute'.

With the info you have available to you in Act 1 (+ most of Act 2), there's no reason for an evil character who wants to live to join or help the cult of the Absolute. The only motivation I can think of is if you just don't care about the tadpole in your head/think it would be really rad to turn into a squid.

[Zevox]

That information is valid too. "Gods are overt, we can even meet them in this game, why don't they solve it" is answered by "Ao." Thus mentioning him makes sense.

Even there it doesn't, actually, because Ao has never forbidden the gods from acting the Realms. They do it all the time, including in this game - see Shar protecting Shadowheart from the shadow curse in act 2, or literally pulling her into her realm to torture her if she doesn't kill Nightsong. The real answer would be that a god like Mystra directly attempting to destroy a threat like the Absolute would get the attention of other gods, and direct conflict between gods would be no good for anyone.

Spoiler

Show

Obviously once you know everything that would be the Dead Three, of which at least Bane would be on a similar level of power to Mystra, but even before knowing that you're lead to believe the Absolute may be a god itself.

It's very relevant. No ToT, no Bhaalspawn, no plot.

I'm very curious what could possibly lead you to that conclusion.

Spoiler

Show

The Bhaalspawn are pretty much irrelevant to this game's plot. Yes, Orin and Saarevok are Bhaalspawn, but Saarevok is a minor player, and Orin is by far the least important of the Dead Three's Chosen. The main plot here is the Absolute: the scheme to infect people with Illithid Tadpoles under the control an Elder Brain that is itself controlled by the Crown of Karsus. That plot seems to have been spearheaded by Gortash, and Ketherick was essential to how Act 2 plays out, but Orin is pretty tacked on by comparison. She's there to be a creepy murderer, and not much more. You could easily replace her with a non-Bhaalspawn Chosen of Bhaal, and nothing would change - or even remove her entirely and just have this be entirely about Gortash and Ketherick hatching this scheme, for that matter.

Plus, again, they did not explain Ao's role in the Time of Troubles, so that as an argument for mentioning Ao is clearly nonsense.

"They must not know what they're doing" is a very weird way of giving them the benefit of the doubt.

What I think is that you're so opposed to changing lore that you'd rather they be incompetent.

No, if there were a good reason for changing the lore, I'd acknowledge that. There is pretty clearly not, though.

Here you go Zevox, saved you an edit war:

[snip for space]

Found in the Last Light Inn.

Thank you, that at least clears that up. Kind of makes me think Larian might've been a bit too free with throwing around the Chosen title, but eh, minor detail at the end of the day since he's an ex-Chosen at that point.

Assuming for a moment that Ao being name dropped was 100% intentional, Does this random change to the lore add anything to the game? would the absence of the precious few lines that reference Ao have negatively affected the game in any way?

I would argue that no, it would not, and that if Larian deliberately chose to ignore that small bit of the setting just for the funzies then it was a small mistake, as for existing fans it has a high chance to detract from the game (however minorly or majorly) whereas new players ignorant of the settings lore would be unlikely to care at all either way.

I cannot actually imagine a scenario in which Ao is even helpful to mention to a new player, as deeply irrelevant as he is in all of the settings plots that do not directly involve him.
If the game intended to feature any real lore whatsoever on the time of troubles, then i might argue differently, but to my knowledge it does not.


Personally, while i think Larian did a rather excellent job all things considered, given that they demonstrably have made numerous errors* in the game itself, i find it somewhat bizarre that anyone would find the mere idea that this was an error preposterous.

Precisely what I'm getting at. This isn't a major problem or anything - if you go back to where I originally brought it up, I said that it isn't a big deal, just something that bugs me because I've been a fan long enough to know this particular bit of how Ao is handled - but is an oddity that stuck out to me, and there's really no good reason to do it. Either it was a simple mistake, or it's a really weird, bad decision, however minor it may be.

[Psyren]

No, if there were a good reason for changing the lore, I'd acknowledge that. There is pretty clearly not, though.

I don't mean to come off blunt, but you aren't the sole arbiter of what is and isn't a good decision for this IP. So needless to say, we disagree.

Even there it doesn't, actually, because Ao has never forbidden the gods from acting the Realms. They do it all the time, including in this game - see Shar protecting Shadowheart from the shadow curse in act 2, or literally pulling her into her realm to torture her if she doesn't kill Nightsong. The real answer would be that a god like Mystra directly attempting to destroy a threat like the Absolute would get the attention of other gods, and direct conflict between gods would be no good for anyone.

Spoiler

Show

Obviously once you know everything that would be the Dead Three, of which at least Bane would be on a similar level of power to Mystra, but even before knowing that you're lead to believe the Absolute may be a god itself.

Shar protecting one dedicated follower from a Sharran phenomenon (and conversely, making her displeasure known to one former follower leaving her domain) barely counts as "intervention."

I'm very curious what could possibly lead you to that conclusion.

Don't worry, I'll find you that screenshot too.

[Zevox]

I don't mean to come off blunt, but you aren't the sole arbiter of what is and isn't a good decision for this IP. So needless to say, we disagree.

I don't claim to be. But your arguments to the contrary have been completely unconvincing, to say the least, so yes, we remain in disagreement.

Shar protecting one dedicated follower from a Sharran phenomenon (and conversely, making her displeasure known to one former follower leaving her domain) barely counts as "intervention."

Right. They're small enough things not to cause direct conflict with other deities. The point remains, the gods can do as they wish within the world, and frequently do. The limiter there is not some edict from Ao, but the threat of what other deities will do in response if they try to do too much. There are more than enough gods in the setting that none of them are immune to that threat, even those among the most powerful like Shar or Mystra.

Don't worry, I'll find you that screenshot too.

Considering you're not even attempting to explain that one, and it would require a lot more than one obscure lore entry, I find myself much more skeptical of that than the Ketheric matter. Though again, it's ultimately also irrelevant to the discussion regarding Ao.

[Anonymouswizard]

Who's shown as knowing about Ao in the game? People particularly close to their god, who probably have the relevant context and personal reasons not to switch to a god who actively does not want mortal worship. There probably are new Ao cults out there, but the knowledge is currently not widespread enough to cause an issue for anybody important.


Also finally broke my oath. Fighting off both Act 3 villains at once felt stupid, and there was no way I was siding with the mass murderer over the technically legitimate (for the moment) tyrant. I actually was expecting this to break my Oath, but only after I'd actually betrayed him and dumped his corpse in the sewer. Guess I get to see the Paladin-specific Dark Urge content after all.

[Errorname]

I feel like half the problem with the 'evil' choices in the game is that there's not enough distinction between 'evil' and 'joining the Absolute'.

With the info you have available to you in Act 1 (+ most of Act 2), there's no reason for an evil character who wants to live to join or help the cult of the Absolute. The only motivation I can think of is if you just don't care about the tadpole in your head/think it would be really rad to turn into a squid.

Designing evil routes is hard, and I think they've handled it better than most for what it's worth.

Spoiler

Show

The Bhaalspawn are pretty much irrelevant to this game's plot. Yes, Orin and Saarevok are Bhaalspawn, but Saarevok is a minor player, and Orin is by far the least important of the Dead Three's Chosen. The main plot here is the Absolute: the scheme to infect people with Illithid Tadpoles under the control an Elder Brain that is itself controlled by the Crown of Karsus. That plot seems to have been spearheaded by Gortash, and Ketherick was essential to how Act 2 plays out, but Orin is pretty tacked on by comparison. She's there to be a creepy murderer, and not much more. You could easily replace her with a non-Bhaalspawn Chosen of Bhaal, and nothing would change - or even remove her entirely and just have this be entirely about Gortash and Ketherick hatching this scheme, for that matter.

Spoiler: Bhaalspawn

Show

Considering that you can play as one and that Orin can potentially be the main character's sister, no they are not pretty much irrelevant to the game's plot. They can be depending on how you play through a Tav run, but they're an integral part of the Dark Urge plot.

[Psyren]

I don't claim to be.

Good.

The point remains, the gods can do as they wish within the world, and frequently do.

There's a lot they can do, but there are still limits/consequences to that (presumably so the gods don't just render adventurers obsolete.)

Who's shown as knowing about Ao in the game? People particularly close to their god, who probably have the relevant context and personal reasons not to switch to a god who actively does not want mortal worship. There probably are new Ao cults out there, but the knowledge is currently not widespread enough to cause an issue for anybody important.

My point exactly.

I feel like half the problem with the 'evil' choices in the game is that there's not enough distinction between 'evil' and 'joining the Absolute'.

With the info you have available to you in Act 1 (+ most of Act 2), there's no reason for an evil character who wants to live to join or help the cult of the Absolute. The only motivation I can think of is if you just don't care about the tadpole in your head/think it would be really rad to turn into a squid.

The way to be evil and oppose the Absolute is to ignore the Tiefling/Grove crisis entirely. Your whole reason for being there as an evil character is purely for your own self-interest, i.e. to find someone to get the tadpole out of your head.

The only person in the entire grove who might be able to help with that is Halsin and he isn't there, so if you're not willing to rescue him or help him with the cult leaders, your only remaining option is to move on and hope one of your other leads (e.g. Auntie Ethel, Githyanki Creche, or even Raphael) pans out.