After two D:OS2 I don't think Larian will be afraid of making their games challenging. I also don't think that IE (or Pillars or Pathfinder for that matter) problem is that they are too difficult - it's that it is unintuitive. Those are games about stats and dice-rolls, and real-time nature and presentation of those games tend to distract from that. Most of the screen you stare it is, in fact, completely unhelpful.
I think making BG3 turn-based will help a lot in jumping over that hurdle, but a lot will depend on feedback and UI design. Something I do like very much is that Larian embraces the dice-roll, rather then hide it. It's is implimented in skill checks and it pops up when making a critical hit. I think this kind of visualization should help a lot in bringing out what +1 actually means.
I actually never liked how BGs did it's difficulty. I felt that making enemy spells make more damage and such was an unenjoyable way of doing it, as it messes with what abilities can do. Magic missile cast by my character or enemy character should work the same way. I would rather see different enemy composition depending on difficulty - something that is more time consuming but I think more enjoyable.
I 100% agree with that turn based will make the ruleset a lot more intuitive to new players and may very well encourage others to try other 'dice' game because of a new understanding. Despite loving RTwP, i must admit turn based does provide an answer to quiet a few usual problems: multiple actions in a round, explanation of rules in 'real time', and more complex encounters instead of just AI that rushes you, while giving you time to react.
Since Larian isnt making up an entire world on the fly, they could just replace normal monsters with a tier higher on harder difficulties. Everything is already leveled out for them, with stronger creatures all predefined and organized. They could leave the CR reward gains out...but that may scale too hard eventually for the group to overcome.
