They should diverge even farther from the 5E rules. Just about little annoyance I have with this game stems from the 5E ruleset and the things where I've thought, "oh that's a cool thing" have been divergences from it.
Put another way, I'm not looking for a faithful adaptation of a tabletop RPG ruleset. I'm looking for an exciting and dynamic party based CRPG. D:OS1+2 show that Larian can deliver on that. The parts of the early access that feel slow or boring or unimaginative have been things that cleave too closely to the tabletop rules. Make a good game first and worry about the tie-in after.
I fully disagree here, the primary reason I was hyped for this is exclusively because I was looking for a CRPG that used the 5E ruleset. So the more diverged from that the game ends up being the less value I will find in it. That said, so far its a LOOOONG way off of anything but a thin veneer of the 5E ruleset. Well beyond the category of "reasonable compromise for adapting it to a video game". There is so much that isn't even close to right. Weapon and spell ranges are way wrong, classes are only partially implemented in alot of places. At best, EA is a good start, but its way not as close to where I personally think it needs to be mechanically to satisfy anyone even remotely concerned with how it implements the 5E ruleset.
BG3 could be a fun CRPG if you don't care at all about 5E mechanics, but if you do, it is disappointing thus far in that regard. It was also pitched to us as being a 5E game, implementing those mechanics, and I don't see that delivered here. That is on them, because I consider myself mislead if it doesn't significantly improve from where its at now in that regard.
