In tabletop D&D advantage isn't something you can easily get by yourself. Instead, you have lots of spells/abilities/maneuvers that grant advantage to your allies. It was designed that way to increase social pleasure around the gaming table. If the party fighter downs the monster because my spell gave him advantage on his roll, we both get enjoyment from that moment. Also the D&D rules system was designed around the idea that advantage should be rare and you need to use up some resources to get it, so it feels meaningful every time.
In BG3, there's new ways to get advantage that are easy to obtain and don't require any outside help (backstab, height). That approach makes sense in a video game, but at the same time, lots of straight-from-D&D spells and abilities end up feeling useless and obsolete. Who can remember the last time they've used Shadowheart's Invoke Duplicity ability? Or carefully positioned Lae'zel to help Astarion trigger a sneak attack? Or spent a spell slot to cast Faerie Fire? These tactical options no longer seem worth the resources they cost, and you just end up focusing on maximizing your damage potential, while advantage gets mostly taken for granted. The result is the whole game ends up feeling much less tactical than standard D&D.
What's the solution to this problem? I don't know exactly, it's a complicated issue. It's up to Larian to figure it out.
May I assume that in TT advantage is something you'll usually try to have for "hard" encounters ?
I.E when you encounter a random/trash goblins group, will you always try to have an advantage not to be screwed by the D20 or isn't that necessary for you to succeed ?
In other word I should say : is "missing" a problem in the TT ?
I'm asking just to know if the missing issues of BG3 comes directly from the TT or from Larian's encounters design (i.e - too high CR creatures for lvl 1 characters)
