Baldur's Gate as a Television Series - Thoughts?

[Minxie18]

Hello! I signed up here looking to hear some opinions from other BG fans regarding a little writing project I'm doing. I've been inspired by the success of Game of Thrones so I'm trying to write a BG script as if it were adapted for television (premium cable style, with the kind of budget and expectations of an HBO, Showtime etc series). I don't expect anything to come of it - it's just for fun.

But anyway, I was hoping to get opinions on the very beginning. In my 'pilot' script, I'm writing the opening scene as a prologue, using the story you hear in Throne of Bhaal about the way Gorion finds the PC. I've planned a scene where we are thrown immediately into a battle scene (the raid on a Bhaal temple), and we see Gorion when he's just killed Alianna. He finds the protagonist, leaves child Sarevok behind and escapes as the whole place collapses around him. That's where the opening credits sequence kicks in, after which I'd then cut to the present day with shots of Candlekeep right before introducing the protagonist and... you get the picture.

So, would that be the best beginning? It's occurred to me that it might be giving too much away, no matter how vague I make the scene (such as no mention of Bhaal, just showing that the protagonist was rescued from a murderous cult as a child, leaving out important details).
Then again I think you'd need a scene like that to establish Gorion as a character (it also establishes the protagonist a lot too, and adequately prepares the audience for the big Child of Bhaal revelation later). And it kind of sets the tone for the whole series (I'm thinking of the way Game of Thrones opened with the White Walkers instead of Winterfell).
I've also debated whether or not to alter things by having Jaheira and/or Khalid at the raid. That's a fairly big change, making them aware of the PC's heritage all along as opposed to simply guessing at it, so I'm hesitant to do that. However I can see it being a good idea to set up solid back story for two main characters, instead of them being introduced with "oh by the way, two old friends of mine are meeting us at the Friendly Arm" and such.

And of course the other option is to scrap that altogether and just use the intro movie itself as a prologue (Sarevok tossing the other Bhaalspawn off the roof). It's an excellent hook by itself, introducing so many things seamlessly at once(our villain, the city, the Iron Throne, and the mystery). I really want to adapt the temple raid scene, but theoretically that could be saved for a flashback sequence once the PC discovers who they really are.

I could write more but my post is already super long... I await your thoughts.

(I hope this thread's in the right sub-forum too... Sorry if it isn't, mods!)

[Arcane]

You would be opposing many baldurs gate fans. The dedicated, such as I, have finished the game on many occasions with different concepts of the protagonist. Not to discourage, but it is perfect in the sense of a game, whereas the person could create their own character and mold at will.

BUT, based on the post you may be ever persistent. Khalid would make a useful character to be a witness of the conception of the Bhaal spawn as he is ultimately killed. And nobody likes Khalid! Hah. But that scene is better left as perhaps a recall in memory. Better to leave the discovery of diabolical heritage through the evolution of the protagonist rather then made obvious at the beginning.
The opening scene of BG1 is perfect. "I will be the last!, and you shall go first!". (You cannot deny Kevin Michael Richardson that role. What a demonic Voice!) It's so inconclusive!

[Minxie18]

Originally Posted by Arcane

You would be opposing many baldurs gate fans. The dedicated, such as I, have finished the game on many occasions with different concepts of the protagonist. Not to discourage, but it is perfect in the sense of a game, whereas the person could create their own character and mold at will.

Lol one of many, many reasons why I doubt this could ever really happen. You could never please everyone. Writing this is just for my own enjoyment for now.

If anyone's curious, the protagonist I intend to write is a female sorceress, 15-18 years old, because I think that's the kind of lead character Hollywood is most likely to go for at this point (from what I hear girls like Arya and Dany are the top of GoT fans' favorite lists, so I think a young, untried, plucky female protagonist would receive the warmest reception from the average tv viewer). My protagonist is young, too, because Hollywood loves coming of age tales. I'm just going for what I think would sell the best really.

BUT, based on the post you may be ever persistent. Khalid would make a useful character to be a witness of the conception of the Bhaal spawn as he is ultimately killed. And nobody likes Khalid! Hah. But that scene is better left as perhaps a recall in memory. Better to leave the discovery of diabolical heritage through the evolution of the protagonist rather then made obvious at the beginning.
The opening scene of BG1 is perfect. "I will be the last!, and you shall go first!". (You cannot deny Kevin Michael Richardson that role. What a demonic Voice!) It's so inconclusive!

The more I think about it, the more I agree. I think it just felt like cheating or something to copy the intro movie exactly, but adaptations are allowed to do that anyway. Thanks for your input!

[Déise]

Male audiences don't mind strong women as part of an ensemble. The record of strong females as the lead isn't as good.

That opening definitely gives too much away. You could maybe start in Candlekeep and move almost straight away to Sarevok's attack to provide the action. It depends on how you want to pace the episode and how much you want to flesh out Candlekeep. If you spend a while there to establish characters who will appear later you could maybe do with a more exciting scene to kick things off. If you don't intend to devote lots of the show to it there's no reason you couldn't have Gorion dying before the title credits. You could pick up afterwards with Imoen finding you in the woods.

[Paracelsi]

It might be best to first introduce Gorion by reputation, just like how SoA/ToB does it. This allows the show to establish Gorion's importance since Gorion does figure prominently in the entire BG2 series especially if the PC favors the "good" path.

Starting with the raid at the Bhaal temple seems cliche, though I agree that it would be best to start the story from Gorion's point of view. Since very little is known about what Gorion used to do when he was a member of the Harpers, I think it would be best to start from there. You also won't be stepping on a lot of BG-fanatic toes if you plan to embellish this part a bit, (ie, go crazy).

[Minxie18]

Originally Posted by Déise

Male audiences don't mind strong women as part of an ensemble. The, record of strong females as the lead isn't as good.

Oh this would definitely be an ensemble series. I couldn't imagine doing otherwise. The PC will be the heart of the show, but my goal is to focus on character relationships, especially within the party.

That opening definitely gives too much away. You could maybe start in Candlekeep and move almost straight away to Sarevok's attack to provide the action. It depends on how you want to pace the episode and how much you want to flesh out Candlekeep. If you spend a while there to establish characters who will appear later you could maybe do with a more exciting scene to kick things off. If you don't intend to devote lots of the show to it there's no reason you couldn't have Gorion dying before the title credits. You could pick up afterwards with Imoen finding you in the woods.

I do plan on fleshing out Candlekeep a bit. I think it's important for helping the audience understand who the PC is (seeing the way she is in her home, where she's comfortable and happy, before it's all taken away from her), as well as defining her relationship with Gorion and Imoen. Candlekeep will be revisited several times later in the show, too, so I think it deserves attention in the beginning. I'm thinking of when the PC briefly returns to Candlekeep of course, but also flashbacks (might include one where Sarevok discovers the PC's existence there) and dream sequences.

The tentative plan is to end the first episode on one of these parts: Gorion's death and the PC's flight into the woods or a bit later when she's met up with Imoen and found Gorion's body, etc. Since this is for premium cable it would probably get no more than 10 fifty minute episodes per season (the usual cable number is 12-13 episodes but GoT only gets 10 because of its budget, and I figured BG would be in a similar situation). If I find myself stressed for episode time later I'll go back and advance the story a bit further in the pilot.

It might be best to first introduce Gorion by reputation, just like how SoA/ToB does it. This allows the show to establish Gorion's importance since Gorion does figure prominently in the entire BG2 series especially if the PC favors the "good" path.

Starting with the raid at the Bhaal temple seems cliche, though I agree that it would be best to start the story from Gorion's point of view. Since very little is known about what Gorion used to do when he was a member of the Harpers, I think it would be best to start from there. You also won't be stepping on a lot of BG-fanatic toes if you plan to embellish this part a bit, (ie, go crazy).

Although I'm leaning away from the temple raid prologue now, I still want to introduce Gorion on screen before the protagonist, but it would be a simple scene within Candlekeep. I was mulling over an introductory scene where we see his room first, his belongings (old maps, books, maybe a magical weapon or two) indicating the kind of person he is, before revealing him at his desk studying a tome/scroll or something (or is this too much like Bilbo's intro in the extended version of The Fellowship of the Ring? Homage or rip off?) The letter from Elminster won't have arrived yet, so Gorion is at peace, so to speak. He'll be interrupted by an indignant monk who's come complaining about the PC - she's skipped out on lessons (he's the tutor) and absconded somewhere - and Gorion has to mollify him before going off to speak to the PC himself. I feel like it's important to include a little fatherly moment between him and the PC before that letter arrives, one that includes light scolding but also warmth and affection.
As for details about his Harper past, I'll probably drop hints in conversations he has with Tethtoril and/or Ulraunt. I think I should definitely feature those two in the beginning because of the role they play later in the game, and there could be a conversation between them after Gorion gets the letter from E (while having Imoen eavesdropping nearby as alternative to her simply finding the letter on his desk).


Two more issues I'd love opinions about:
First, what do you guys think about featuring the villains while they were 'off screen' in the game? Should Sarevok, or anybody in the Iron Throne and the bandits be shown on screen doing their plotting and/or reacting to the PC's actions? My instinct is to say no, because the unfolding mystery is a big strength of the game's narrative. But I only hesitate because sometimes it might be better for the audience to see and know the villains beforehand so that there's a bigger payoff when the PC faces them. It's easier to care more about those climactic confrontations if we haven't basically just met the villain... Another benefit is that you have scenes to cut away too when you need a brief break from the main characters (time skips for travelling as one example).
So, should I use 'behind the scene' scenes with the antagonists at all? Or should I rely on building up their reputations only?

Minsc
He's such a beloved character and I'm quite attached to him myself, but is he too over the top for television? He fits right in in the game, but I fear that he's a bit too one-note to be taken seriously in, for instance, an HBO or Showtime drama series.
My question is, what do you do with a character like Minsc? My thought is that he'd be a minor, supporting character (next to the more plot significant Dynaheir) with occasional comic relief moments, although I worry about the Boo jokes getting old. I think he could be have a decent arc in season 1, the first game, but beyond that it'd be tough to keep him from becoming a static character. Thinking ahead, I'm sorry to say that I've considered killing him off in the beginning of the BG2 story, perhaps at the same time as Dynaheir, or later during the escape from Irenicus' dungeon in order to up the stakes (and to keep the cast from being crowded when you've got new characters coming in.

[Déise]

First off, I'd better admit I've never actually gone past the half way stage in BG1 (and finished SoA). I have read the basics of much of the plot though.

The most important thing to decide first is what you're aiming for. If you're aiming for Game of Thrones in that it has a complex multi-layered plot and deep, realistic characters I don't think you can stick too closely to the game (sacrilege!). The narrative for a lot of it is: heroes arrive in area, solve the problems they find and leave. The place and the people they meet never come into it again. That's like the A-Team with swords. Not a bad thing of course but you'll have a tough job making it intellectual. If you want a HBO quality adult drama I'd take chunks from the game, mix them up and add your own bits in.

I'd focus on the city itself from early on. The protagonist doesn't have to show up straight away but wouldn't take long getting there. The main plot for the opening arc would be the iron shortage. The main faction would be the authorities and individuals' attempts to either solve the crisis or to use it to advance themselves. Sarevok would be involved here without his true character being revealed. The bandits would be another side story but only showing the lower ranks and their immediate superiors. Candlekeep and its wizards should be a faction but I'm not sure how to involve them too much throughout. Amnian agents and diplomats under suspicion would be a minor faction and also allow you to create a good link to SoA season 2. A good opening could be a bandit raid where the bandits aren't interested in gold, only iron. Action packed but intriguing.

I'd agree that Minsc is either comic relief or toned down (probably both). You'll have to leave out heaps of characters or else have them just as cameos anyway. Which are you thinking on focusing on? No need to stick to the canon party.

[Minxie18]

Originally Posted by Déise

First off, I'd better admit I've never actually gone past the half way stage in BG1 (and finished SoA). I have read the basics of much of the plot though.

The most important thing to decide first is what you're aiming for. If you're aiming for Game of Thrones in that it has a complex multi-layered plot and deep, realistic characters I don't think you can stick too closely to the game (sacrilege!). The narrative for a lot of it is: heroes arrive in area, solve the problems they find and leave. The place and the people they meet never come into it again. That's like the A-Team with swords. Not a bad thing of course but you'll have a tough job making it intellectual. If you want a HBO quality adult drama I'd take chunks from the game, mix them up and add your own bits in.

I'd focus on the city itself from early on. The protagonist doesn't have to show up straight away but wouldn't take long getting there. The main plot for the opening arc would be the iron shortage. The main faction would be the authorities and individuals' attempts to either solve the crisis or to use it to advance themselves. Sarevok would be involved here without his true character being revealed. The bandits would be another side story but only showing the lower ranks and their immediate superiors. Candlekeep and its wizards should be a faction but I'm not sure how to involve them too much throughout. Amnian agents and diplomats under suspicion would be a minor faction and also allow you to create a good link to SoA season 2. A good opening could be a bandit raid where the bandits aren't interested in gold, only iron. Action packed but intriguing.

Nice, you've given me a lot to think about. I like the idea of devoting attention to the intrigues going on in the city. It'd be a good place to check in on every episode or so while the party is off solving the iron crisis, and it would be great to bring things full circle when the party finally arrives at the city.
I'll work on picking characters to focus on... there's Scar and Eltan, the other Grand Dukes, members of the Merchant League, that Ender Sai fellow, the Harper presence in the city (Entillis Fulsom), and of course the Iron Throne guys themselves. Just off the top of my head I could write about them quietly advancing their goals while trying to stay under the radar, and having a few stand out characters like Eltan being suspicious.
I think it might be OK to let the audience realize that the Iron Throne are the bad guys early, before the main characters do... In Game of Thrones, for instance, the audience learns the big royal secret in the first episode while Ned Stark spends most of the season figuring it out. There's still Sarevok's twist to serve as a surprise revelation later.
The Shadow Thieves played a small role in the game too so I think I could expand their part to bridge season 1 and 2, and I could definitely invent Amnian agents or diplomats like you suggested.

I'd agree that Minsc is either comic relief or toned down (probably both). You'll have to leave out heaps of characters or else have them just as cameos anyway. Which are you thinking on focusing on? No need to stick to the canon party.

Right now I want to use Imoen, Jaheira, Khalid, Dynaheir, Minsc and Kivan as core party members in season 1. Imoen, Jaheira and Khalid, because of course. Dynaheir will be important for making cryptic Bhaal hints, as she came to the Sword Coast looking for the Bhaalspawn of the prophecy, and suspects the PC. She'll also teach Imoen magic. Minsc is part of the Dynaheir package, naturally. I think Kivan is a valuable character to include because of his connection to Tazok and the bandits.
Yeslick will play a small role too.

I've always loved Edwin but I think I'll save him for BG2. Same with Viconia. Other BG2 additions will be: Yoshimo (definitely), Aerie (maybe), Keldorn (maybe, and only temporarily if that).

This brings me to another topic: What would the fan reaction be to other original characters being a part of the main group? I have ideas for as many as 3 new party members, characters that I dreamed up during my many runs through the games. They wouldn't be Bhaalspawn, just people joining up with the group for their own reasons. I'm tempted to write them in is so that they can say and do some of the PC's options from the game that my protagonist can't do. They could say certain lines of dialogue, for instance, that wouldn't fit my PC's personality, and they could be part of a romance or two. I actually don't plan on having my PC herself involved in any romances. She's like my Frodo, basically, while other characters can go be Aragorn and Arwen together .
Of course, more original party members would make the party quite large... Then again, the Fellowship was perfect with 9, and the 'original' adventuring party of The Hobbit (as my brother calls it) numbered 14. Lol who's to say how many is too many?

[Déise]

LotR only really followed the fellowship around though. If you're also devoting time to other factions you won't have time to develop all the characters properly and it'll also get very confusing for the viewer. I think you'd have to go for either the GoT route or the LotR one.

There's no problem with introducing new characters but you have to have a very clear idea of where they fit in the overall scheme (unless they're a cameo for a scene or two). Including them just because they're cool on their own would probably just be messy. If possible I'd look at maybe changing the existing characters. Arwen in the film LotR is an amalgamation of Arwen/Legolas/her brothers from the book. Many other adaptations completely rewrite characters and leave them unrecognisable. I'd try and change the existing characters first to bring in your ideas but if a new character would work better then just do it.

[Minxie18]

Originally Posted by Déise

LotR only really followed the fellowship around though. If you're also devoting time to other factions you won't have time to develop all the characters properly and it'll also get very confusing for the viewer. I think you'd have to go for either the GoT route or the LotR one.

That's true... I suppose the LotR route would be spending the majority of the time on the main party doing their thing, while occasionally checking in on the city, if at all (like FotR checked in on Saruman). I'd lose drama from potential city intrigue, but I think I could make up for it by having the drama come from my adventuring party as they try to overcome their differences, learn to trust each other, and work together as a team, all while my PC is evolving into a leader.

There's no problem with introducing new characters but you have to have a very clear idea of where they fit in the overall scheme (unless they're a cameo for a scene or two). Including them just because they're cool on their own would probably just be messy. If possible I'd look at maybe changing the existing characters. Arwen in the film LotR is an amalgamation of Arwen/Legolas/her brothers from the book. Many other adaptations completely rewrite characters and leave them unrecognisable. I'd try and change the existing characters first to bring in your ideas but if a new character would work better then just do it.

I do have a clear idea of how they'd fit in, but I like the idea of amalgamating existing characters too. I'm hesitant to change the originals too much but it'd be worth a shot. Thanks!

A minor issue: What about the title of the show? Does 'Baldur's Gate' suffice? My instinct is to just stick with it, but when I did try think about suitable alternatives I figured anything that suggests dualism, good vs evil, two sides of a coin or similar might work. But then, of course, you lose BG name recognition...

[SlickRCBD]

There is no need to limit the amount of party members to a certain number aside from conflicting alignments and the way certain combinations will come to blows. You can have all the NPCs in the game as part of the party at some point, with Minsc, Dynahir, Jaheria, Kahalid, and Imoen as the main cast. You can even keep a lot more people as regulars. There is no need to keep it at a 6-man band. I never liked the fact you were forced to drop people when you exceeded the 6-person limit, and having others join and travel with the group would be a welcome change. You can do it several ways, with them picking several people to go on a various outings, splitting into groups to assault various targets, or just staying as a big party instead of a small one.

Another issue that might be nit-picky, but it's something I'd like to state.
From the source material, I thought Bioware strongly hinted that the Bhaalspawn was supposed to be human (same age as Imoen and the other races age and mature differently. Especially the elves) and male (three romances vs just Amoen and a little flirting from Har'delis. Only humans, elves, and half-elves can romance so more evidence of the Bhaalspawn being human as half-elves and elves would grow up slower than Imoen) and of good alignment. Class choice was more open, but I didn't think he was a Paladin even though some of those kits were fun in SoA. I didn't think he was a Cleric, Ranger, or Druid either. Not growing up cloistered in Candlekeep. Fighter, Thief, or Mage or any combination was how I saw the PC. I thought fighter might be the most fitting to contrast with Saravok, really shadowing the Good vs Evil conflict. but there wasn't enough to contradict Thief, Mage, dual-class, or a kit.

Those are just my thoughts. I hope I'm not being too nitpicky, but I believe we did have a thread about what people believed Bioware intended the Bhaalspawn to be a year or two ago. I'm pretty sure there was general agreement on human male.

That said, I've played all of those classes (although in BG2 I always played a druid kit or fighter/druid, never a pure druid) and played both sexes. I'm just stating that based on my interpretation of the in-game data, meta-data, and game files, those are my opinions on the PC. A plucky female just doesn't fit my vision of the Bhaalspawn in the game. Then again, Imoen was fond of saying "You're a queer fellow" in BG1 so if said female is also a lesbian, I might better understand why you thought that. Although I don't see the PC as a lesbian either given that you can only romance Amoen as a female PC.

[Harbourboy]

Are you going to have that guy who keeps talking and you can't shut him up? I can't remember his name. Something like Neeber?

[Minxie18]

Originally Posted by SlickRCBD

You can do it several ways, with them picking several people to go on a various outings, splitting into groups to assault various targets, or just staying as a big party instead of a small one.

That's something I intend to do, yeah. I'm enjoying the freedom of being able to split up the party to accomplish different tasks at the same time. I sometimes wished I could do that while playing, especially in BG2.

Another issue that might be nit-picky, but it's something I'd like to state.
From the source material, I thought Bioware strongly hinted that the Bhaalspawn was supposed to be human (same age as Imoen and the other races age and mature differently. Especially the elves) and male (three romances vs just Amoen and a little flirting from Har'delis. Only humans, elves, and half-elves can romance so more evidence of the Bhaalspawn being human as half-elves and elves would grow up slower than Imoen) and of good alignment. Class choice was more open, but I didn't think he was a Paladin even though some of those kits were fun in SoA. I didn't think he was a Cleric, Ranger, or Druid either. Not growing up cloistered in Candlekeep. Fighter, Thief, or Mage or any combination was how I saw the PC. I thought fighter might be the most fitting to contrast with Saravok, really shadowing the Good vs Evil conflict. but there wasn't enough to contradict Thief, Mage, dual-class, or a kit.

Those are just my thoughts. I hope I'm not being too nitpicky, but I believe we did have a thread about what people believed Bioware intended the Bhaalspawn to be a year or two ago. I'm pretty sure there was general agreement on human male.

That said, I've played all of those classes (although in BG2 I always played a druid kit or fighter/druid, never a pure druid) and played both sexes. I'm just stating that based on my interpretation of the in-game data, meta-data, and game files, those are my opinions on the PC. A plucky female just doesn't fit my vision of the Bhaalspawn in the game. Then again, Imoen was fond of saying "You're a queer fellow" in BG1 so if said female is also a lesbian, I might better understand why you thought that. Although I don't see the PC as a lesbian either given that you can only romance Amoen as a female PC.

Fair enough. I agree with you about the PC being meant to be 'human', in a way, and that's what mine would be. However, in my view, the gender of the Bhaalspawn isn't a huge issue. For instance, I don't think being male or female impacts the story drastically. I think a woman could parallel Sarevok just as easily as a man. Lol I'm not trying to launch some kind of feminist attack, really. In this story and setting, that statement is quite true because the PC is half-god and wields magic, so there's no reason she can't be literally as strong as Sarevok. And she won't be involved in a romance anyway.
(Although on that note, I would argue that the reason why there are more female love interests than male ones is because there are more male gamers than female - it was a more that Black Isle and co were designing the game realistically in regards to their customers, rather than saying outright that the PC is meant to be male. I think I read also that if not for budget and time constraints, Haer'dalis and Valygar would have been complete romance options too, making the LIs equal.)

Another thing is that, in my view, the male lead in fantasy is like the default, go to option. I want this series' PC to be a bit more unexpected.

Are you going to have that guy who keeps talking and you can't shut him up? I can't remember his name. Something like Neeber?

Lol, sadly, I don't foresee Neeber making the cut, somehow. In giving myself 10 episodes, there will be little filler time to spare for characters like Neeber. Or is it Noober? One of them was in Trademeet in BG2 if I recall...

[Mesmero]

Originally Posted by Arcane

And nobody likes Khalid!

I always liked Khalid

Originally Posted by Minxie18

from what I hear girls like Arya and Dany are the top of GoT fans' favorite lists, so I think a young, untried, plucky female protagonist would receive the warmest reception from the average tv viewer).

I actually find Daenerys annoying on occasions. Might be the actress tho, I think she is a bit over the top sometimes. Arya is awesome, and although one of the main characters, she often has a role of a submissive nature: whether being trained by the sword master, as a servant of Tywin, or as Gendry's "little sister" (submissive might not be the right word, but it's the only word I can think of right now). I think Imoen fits that role perfectly.

Originally Posted by Déise

Male audiences don't mind strong women as part of an ensemble. The record of strong females as the lead isn't as good.

I would much rather see a male protagonist in such a series. There are plenty of diverse female characters, like the little sister (Imoen), a strong woman (Jaheira), not to mention other character like Dynaheir and Viconia who bring along a lot of personality. I fear a female protagonist would get too much into Imoen's role, and we already have one Imoen, no need for there being two

Originally Posted by Minxie18

Another thing is that, in my view, the male lead in fantasy is like the default, go to option. I want this series' PC to be a bit more unexpected.

True, but putting a female in the lead might quickly lead to another Dark Angel, or Nikita. And see my point above about women with their own flavor. But it's your story, just putting in my 2 cents.

Originally Posted by Minxie18

Minsc
He's such a beloved character and I'm quite attached to him myself, but is he too over the top for television? He fits right in in the game, but I fear that he's a bit too one-note to be taken seriously in, for instance, an HBO or Showtime drama series.
My question is, what do you do with a character like Minsc?

Minor character waaaaaaay toned down, but still definitely being Minsc. Like a character they are supposed to meet in Nashkel (it was Nashkel, right? Sorry it's been almost 15 years ago ), which at first comes across as menacing (he is Minsc, he is huge, he has his face tattood), but later they find out he has a big heart and a love for his hamster. Might take out the completely crazy part, but perhaps make him a bit of a quiet guy, and make him say his catch phrases such as "I need a bigger sword" a bit sarcastically and "Evil, meet my sword! Sword, meet evil!" more angrily instead of humoristically. Less of a bastard than The Dog tho, maybe a bit like that big chick who serves Lady Stark. Perhaps add a hint of crazy. Minor character tho, maybe with some recurrance.

Originally Posted by Minxie18

This brings me to another topic: What would the fan reaction be to other original characters being a part of the main group?

I would rather see some ideas incorporated into other characters instead, characters who have less flavor of their own. I mean, did anyone ever play with Yeslick, Garrick, Safana, Skie, Eldoth, Shar-Teel, etc? I always though there are much more interesting characters available. If you want to introduce new charachters, you might look at if those characters can be merged with other character, to make them a bit more interesting.

[Rawgrim]

I think its a bad idea. It works very well as a video game, sure. But as a tv-series? Nope.

1. The whole setting is a Tolkien rip-off.
2. Elves and dwarves are pretty much "bad words" in fantasy these days.
3. The spell system only works in game-form. in books or anything else, its just dreadful.
4. The budget. The CGI dragons and mosters wouldn`t end up looking good at all.
5. Moves\tv series based on video games pretty much allways end up sucking bigtime.

Sure, its fun to speculate in who would play Jaheira and stuff like that, but I doubt the result would anything but utter trash.

[Minxie18]

Originally Posted by Mesmero

I always liked Khalid
I would much rather see a male protagonist in such a series. There are plenty of diverse female characters, like the little sister (Imoen), a strong woman (Jaheira), not to mention other character like Dynaheir and Viconia who bring along a lot of personality. I fear a female protagonist would get too much into Imoen's role, and we already have one Imoen, no need for there being two

Good points. Although I do think that the PC in this story would be sufficiently different from Imoen that there's no risk of mixing them up or anything.

There's another particular reason why I've settled on a young female PC too. In 'TV Tropes' terms, the PC I want to write will probably be a bit of these things: a Woobie, Magnetic Hero, The Heart, Mysterious Waif, and Blessed With Suck. Especially early on, she's going to be a very vulnerable and sensitive character, and this is a big part of how she is able to draw people to her group. She'll inspire many of them to want to protect her. I kind of liken her to the River Tam character in Firefly/Serenity. My PC is nowhere near as troubled and erratic as River, but for a long time she's going to have the same kind of position within the group (before she comes into her own).
Can you see why I might think a girl is more suited to such a role than a boy?

Originally Posted by Rawgrim

I think its a bad idea. It works very well as a video game, sure. But as a tv-series? Nope.

1. The whole setting is a Tolkien rip-off.
2. Elves and dwarves are pretty much "bad words" in fantasy these days.
3. The spell system only works in game-form. in books or anything else, its just dreadful.
4. The budget. The CGI dragons and mosters wouldn`t end up looking good at all.
5. Moves\tv series based on video games pretty much allways end up sucking bigtime.

Sure, its fun to speculate in who would play Jaheira and stuff like that, but I doubt the result would anything but utter trash.

1. I agree with this, but it can't be helped. The Forgotten Realms is still an appealing and interesting setting. And really I think the most obvious similarities are the Elves, Evermeet, and all that. The rest of the setting, especially the diverse array of human societies and civilizations, seem different enough from Tolkien IMO.
2. Not sure about this, though... Where have you heard that?
I doubt The Hobbit movies are going to have trouble with their big cast of dwarves and elves, for one thing. I can point out also that a common complaint about the recent Snow White and the Huntsman movie was that the dwarves weren't utilized enough. Done with care, I don't think people have a problem with elves and dwarves or whatever in general.
3. True, sometimes, but then again all the Harry Potter movies did fine despite all the spells being thrown around. As long as the magic follows clear rules and isn't over done it ought to be fine on screen.
4. Probably the biggest hurdle. Everything would have to written with the budget in mind, so anything requiring lots of CGI would have to be used sparingly, if at all. The show will need to rely on characters, not visuals.
5. To be fair, the reason they suck is because they were usually directed by people like Uwe Boll. He's certainly no Alan Taylor or Neil Marshall, etc.
Arguably past video-game adaptations have used unwieldy source material in general, whereas BG has a superior narrative compared to many other games.

[Rawgrim]

1. I has all the races from Tolkien. The elves are pretty much the same, so are the dwarves. The halflings are copies of the hobbits. Viewers will be screaming rip-off, all the way (not the BG fans).

2. The Hobbit is the prequel to one of the most popular books ever written, and one of the most popular film franchises as well. Try looking at fantasy book forums, and whatsnot. Elves and Dwarves are almost a bad word in fantasy these days. Mostly its just d&d litterature that has elves and such now. Newer authors shy away from them.

3. How would you make it seem logical, to a viewer, that a wizard has to memorize the same spell several times, ever day? I mean, you just have to memorize it once. And how long will it take for an inteligent wizard to actually know the spell, without having to study the same thing every single day?

4. I agree.

5. Belive it or not, Boll is improving. Darfur, Max Schmelling (both drama movies) were actually very good. Still, he has only directed 4-5 video game movies. Max Payne, for instance, had a fantastic story. Just like BG does. Ended very very poorly. The list of poor video game movies is a very very long one.

[hannibal555]

I like your idea .
Sure, the FR world is clicheed and geeky, but after all well laid out characters and an interesting story is what makes a narrative good or bad.

Have you already experience as a writer of fan fiction?

[Minxie18]

Originally Posted by Rawgrim

1. I has all the races from Tolkien. The elves are pretty much the same, so are the dwarves. The halflings are copies of the hobbits. Viewers will be screaming rip-off, all the way (not the BG fans).

2. The Hobbit is the prequel to one of the most popular books ever written, and one of the most popular film franchises as well. Try looking at fantasy book forums, and whatsnot. Elves and Dwarves are almost a bad word in fantasy these days. Mostly its just d&d litterature that has elves and such now. Newer authors shy away from them.

3. How would you make it seem logical, to a viewer, that a wizard has to memorize the same spell several times, ever day? I mean, you just have to memorize it once. And how long will it take for an inteligent wizard to actually know the spell, without having to study the same thing every single day?

4. I agree.

5. Belive it or not, Boll is improving. Darfur, Max Schmelling (both drama movies) were actually very good. Still, he has only directed 4-5 video game movies. Max Payne, for instance, had a fantastic story. Just like BG does. Ended very very poorly. The list of poor video game movies is a very very long one.

1. Probably, yeah, but ultimately I think this story could still be seen as fresh even though it recycles Tolkien's creatures.
2. No matter what certain people may think about fantasy creatures like dwarves or elves these days, I don't think it inevitably means you can't use them in stories anymore. Like someone declared that elves and dwarves aren't cool anymore therefore they aren't allowed. I don't buy that. ^.^
3. I wasn't planning on following the spellcasting rules from the game to the letter, really. I was going to change it around a bit to make it so spellcasting is more subtle, and I might not even use the memorize and use spell once per day rule. I haven't finalized all of this yet but I'm going to try saying, perhaps, that mages have a certain number of spells they can use before they're tapped out for the day, or some spells take more out of them than others - any ideas that would basically prevent mages from being too powerful, and keeping magic 'special' within the show so it's not over the top, overused, etc.
5. I would think that Max Payne being a poor movie is more the fault of the screenwriter/producers/directors than it was the source material... Even good books can turn out badly as films if they're mishandled. I don't like the notion that video games can't be good movies just because... One of these days the cycle must be broken.

Originally Posted by hannibal555

I like your idea .
Sure, the FR world is clicheed and geeky, but after all well laid out characters and an interesting story is what makes a narrative good or bad.

Have you already experience as a writer of fan fiction?

Thank you and I agree.

I dabbled in fanfiction when I was high school and some of university. I always wanted to be a writer and that was practice back then. Nowadays I have several original projects I'm planning on the side while working as an English teacher. I want to write novels and screenplays, and doing this BG TV project is good practice for the latter.

[SlickRCBD]

Originally Posted by Minxie18

Oh this would definitely be an ensemble series. I couldn't imagine doing otherwise. The PC will be the heart of the show, but my goal is to focus on character relationships, especially within the party.

Minsc
He's such a beloved character and I'm quite attached to him myself, but is he too over the top for television? He fits right in in the game, but I fear that he's a bit too one-note to be taken seriously in, for instance, an HBO or Showtime drama series.
My question is, what do you do with a character like Minsc? My thought is that he'd be a minor, supporting character (next to the more plot significant Dynaheir) with occasional comic relief moments, although I worry about the Boo jokes getting old. I think he could be have a decent arc in season 1, the first game, but beyond that it'd be tough to keep him from becoming a static character. Thinking ahead, I'm sorry to say that I've considered killing him off in the beginning of the BG2 story, perhaps at the same time as Dynaheir, or later during the escape from Irenicus' dungeon in order to up the stakes (and to keep the cast from being crowded when you've got new characters coming in.

I can think of several anime characters that are as outrageous and over-the-top as Minsc, but they are indeed minor characters that occasionally get to star in an episode or two. I can't think of any non-anime characters off the top of my head, so I'm not sure how applicable Might Guy from Naruto or Major Armstrong from Full Metal Alchemist would be.

---------- Added 0 hours, 14 minutes and 2 seconds later... ----------

Originally Posted by Rawgrim

1. I has all the races from Tolkien. The elves are pretty much the same, so are the dwarves. The halflings are copies of the hobbits. Viewers will be screaming rip-off, all the way (not the BG fans).

In the manuals for the Gold Box games, it outright said that Halflings were also called Hobbits. I can't recall if that was in my 2nd edition PHB or not. I"ll check back and edit the post tomorrow.

==snip==
3. How would you make it seem logical, to a viewer, that a wizard has to memorize the same spell several times, ever day? I mean, you just have to memorize it once. And how long will it take for an inteligent wizard to actually know the spell, without having to study the same thing every single day?

My group created a spell points system eerily similar to the one Skysaber/Polychrome Knight/Jared Ornstead described in his SI "Skysaber's Choice". But before that we never liked that aspect and made it so you could only memorize a spell once unless it was something reversible or with variants like cause/cure blindness, fireshield red/blue, or Emotion, and then you could only memorize each variant once.
Still, the Vancian spell casting doesn't work too well on film in the D&D form. However, it can be explained as "preparing my spells for the day" rather than "memorizing my spells". A wizard must spend hours preparing what spells he intends to cast, and then releases them quickly with a ritual trigger. Same mechanics, a few different words.

[SlickRCBD]

I think I found the debate on CHARNAME's race, sex and class, although it was posted much longer in the past than I thought. I hadn't realized it had been five years. Maybe there was another thread more recently?

http://www.sorcerers.net/forums/show...ighlight=canon

[Minxie18]

Originally Posted by SlickRCBD

I think I found the debate on CHARNAME's race, sex and class, although it was posted much longer in the past than I thought. I hadn't realized it had been five years. Maybe there was another thread more recently?

http://www.sorcerers.net/forums/show...ighlight=canon

Ah, thanks for the link. That was interesting to read, especially the alignment parts. I like that Chaotic Good was the winner. That was always my go to alignment when I wanted to play as 'canon' as possible.

That thread brings up something else I thought I should ask about. Looking way ahead into the future, how should I handle Abazigal and Draconis? It seems like they generate a lot of controversy... I can accept the explanation that Bhaal could have spawned Abazigal centuries earlier so that he and Draconis could be old enough to be fully grown dragons. But if it was you writing the Throne of Bhaal adaptation would you keep those two characters as is? What would you change?
I can see myself deciding to write Draconis out of the story and just keeping Abazigal... It's cheaper (although who knows, featuring CGI like that could be more feasible 6 or 7+ years from now when this hypothetical show would reach the 'Abazigal' episode). The dragons might start becoming redundant at that point, too... I definitely want to include at least Fiirkraag and Adalon in the story somehow. They serve as such nice contrasts to each other. (The other 2 dragons could reasonably be written out)