And I partially agree those but not all..sometimes we go too far, it totally makes sense not being able to eat during combat but there it is on the book. You loose some and win some while going from table top to digital game so thats one of those. Showing is an action in PnP but again it can also knock your enemy prone. We dont have that..we also dont have grapple which if u succeed u can keep moving half ur speed and ttack aswell..its just complicated stuff.
From all the discussion above I would only agree with high grounds shouldn't give advantage.. it should provide half cover (+2 AC) for ranged.. and backstab being available if u r higher than your enemy is out of nowhere..Although again in PHB if your enemy has 1 melee target u r entitled to use it where as in game it requires 2melees other than you.
I think the biggest issue with food in combat is the healing factor. It cheapens the abilities of the cleric and reduces the threat of the monsters. What ends up happening is, combat balance will start ASSUMING healing by food which ultimately will affect monster durability. As you said, it's complicated stuff. Let's not make it more complicated.
Backstab isn't just higher ground. You literally can move behind your foe and you gain advantage. No high ground needed. Also backstab is in the realm of rogues only. There is optional flanking but what BG3 is doing is beyond flanking.
