And there a statements in the interview that make me scratch my head like:
Quote
"One example is the Fighter class. In the tabletop game it’s basically a tutorial class to teach people how to play D&D"
<insert question mark meme>
Not really something that someone with a good understanding of the game would say.
I agree with you there. That's . . . not a great quote. But as we all know, Swen loves wizards, only plays wizards, as he said in an interview. So he probably considers fighters and rogues to be "boring", as a lot of pure-caster players do. It's not a great guiding principle going into designing a D&D game, though.
BG3 hates melee character and you can feel it everywhere in the game. Disengage as a bonus action, useless and broken AOO, number of ennemies spellcaster / archers / range weapon (incl. surfaces potions)... etc...
That's very sad because I like melee character and because they could be important part of the tactical component in such party based games. The warrior is usefull if the game allow him to be useful... Larian's rules just don't, becausr they don't care about such classes.
