In that case why bother attaching it specifically to 5th Edition. The edition specifically denotes the change in ruleset, whereas the Forgotten Realms, Baldur's Gate, all the campaign setting stuff is basically system version agnostic. The whole point of designating itself a 5E game is to use the 5E ruleset. To the point of the ruleset being boring, I often find anyone suggesting that, when probed further, typically reveal they don't actually know the ruleset well enough to even credibly have that opinion. Lastly, Solasta is doing very well, and while limited by the more restrictive SRD only license, its super faithful implementation of the ruleset is actually very popular and its primary advertised selling point. So dogging the system the game is based on to cover for your own, or the developers understanding/inability to implement it seems pretty sad. I echo the sentiment of the poster above who asked, "Then why even bother with the license in the first place?"
Simply because it's the newest? More in style? So it'd be better for marketing purposes? Also maybe because it's the least complicated system so it'd be easier to work with/adapt, give them more room for mixing in their own rules?
I think the question was more about DnD rather than the 5th edition.
I guess he could have wrote something like : why didn't they create DoS3 or another IP rather than an game "based" on DnD ? And the answer is probably something like "marketing purposes".
At the moment BG3 is not 100% satisfying both for DoS fans and for DnD fans. Ofc with a lot of nuance but it's pretty obvious that BG3 is an hybrid.
DnD looks like a constraint for Larian and reworking everything create many issues.
