(Not to mention the disingenuous "it's not D&D 5e rules" but the "Love the disengage mechanic" or the "don't use it if you like it" that makes me think that you really don't understand the problem as a whole)
You were suggesting that using your hoembrew rule ,+1 or +2 for height advantage, would be better than Larian's usage of advantage for high ground even though Larian is using RAW(Rules as Written) (Pg. 173 of Player's Handbook "The DM can also decide that circumstances influence a roll in one direction or the other and grant advantage or impose disadvantage as a result."
You are being disingenuous when you argue Larian is homebrewing when you are really arguing against a Rules as Written implementation of advantage.
I gave you facts.
Those facts limit our creativity, our choices, our tactical possibilities, the (tactical) depth of the game, the replay value of the game, the control we have over our characters, they create balance issues, and so on...
No. Those were not facts. The game doesn't change how I play D&D nor does it force me to play in a certain way.
It all comes down to approach. Role-Playing vs. Gaming Computers. I am a role-player who does things that make sense for my character to do.
That means long resting every 10 or so combats and only when I am out of resources and in a safe spot. That means not carrying around full barrels of explosive liquid because that's just silly.
That means not eating pig heads in combat because it wouldn't make sense. It means not hiding in combat because I'm just beyond and enemies vision cone.
The game is in no way, shape or form balanced around my characters doing those things.
I remember in earlier installments of BG folks would cast cloudkill at the edge of the fog of war and wait while the enemies died and thought themselves clever. I would never do that because my characters didn't know what was on the other side of the fog of war. Even though it was an "optimal" way to beat the encounter because the enemies couldn't fight back. Even though the game rewarded you for doing so.
There are those who think they aren't being optimal unless they exploit game mechanics. If that is all they do then of course they have chosen to limit their creativity and chosen to ignore the uniqueness of the classes.
There are those who role-play their characters. Each character is unique and you need to use all your abilities to be successful.
Just like any good game of D&D.
These are facts and as an argument you're only giving your personnal preferences about "role playing" your characters.
Using "what make sense" according to you is only YOUR way of playing the game. No one ever suggested that you shouldn't be able to play the game according to YOUR role play definition if that's what you want. You know, like in DnD.
But many players of tactical turn based video games are interrested in higher difficulty levels, challenging combats, tactical depth, lots of choices and possibilities to deal with encounters.
But you WON'T have choices at higher level of difficulty. In Baldur's Gate 3 you'll HAVE to use the same mechanics over and over again because that's how the game is actually made and balanced whatever you like it or not.
You can choose to have a more complicated experience for the sake of your role playing preferences... It doesn't change THE FACTS :
- that every combats are builded for you to use highround and backstab as the only/the easiest sources of advantages
- that you have to have an advantage most of the time to survive/to win
- that dipping your weapons is so easy/powerfull that it's ridiculously overkill
- that shoving/thunderwave creatures can often lead to an instant win even against the most powerfull bosses
- that you can avoid 100% of the AOO easily
- that you'll always play with the same patern if you try to optimize your actions, in exemple to deal with higher difficulty levels (higher with ranged, backstab with melee, jump to go further, jump to disengage, drink potions or eat pig head each turns, dip your weapons,...)
I"m 100% fine with your personnal preferences and you should be able to play the game according to your role play preferences.
But you're blind if you cannot see that the game has a few GOOD/optimal choices and PLENTY bad/suboptimal choices.
And I'm not talking about exploiting a fog of war, a bug or a specific class build. I'm talking about the most basic rules of the game, available for every characters, those you'll learn in the tutorial or those you know how to play with if you're a tactical TB game player (i.e AOO).
If the game is known to be "(very) hard if you don't know Larian's rules" and "(very) easy if you do", that's not without any reasons. If some players can easily solo'd the game with any classes while other struggle with a party of 4, there are reasons.
What you're doing in the game is YOUR choice but don't tell me how I should play the game. Telling the other that they're wrong is only YOUR point, not mine.
DnD is balanced, interresting and vast enough for you to enjoy your role play definition and for me to enjoy deep and consistent tactical combats. BG3 is definitely not.
Edit : You're right, the game doesn't force you to hide (bug the AI), to eat pigs heads (tons of potions), to use barrels (choice for fun). That's only 3 points I personnaly never complained about...
Well TBH I complained about eating pig heads mainly because it's completely ridiculous and because it's overkill compared to potions. According to me it MAY also become a repetitive - needs / better choices - in higher diffculty level but I cannot be 100% sure about this one.
Itemization will probably change a lot at release, the ridiculousness of the mechanic won't.
