I really wonder why some of you D&D people are so insisting on making this game as bland as possible.
I understand that this would work perfectly fine in a pure tabletop session, with a DM and a lot of metacommunication around the table, but this is still a PC game - and us PC gamers really require more than spamming the same skill / spell all the time, games have evolved.
See it as an opportunity - maybe even tabletop sessions will get better in the future because DMs may learn that they can setup interesting, puzzle-like fights instead of just having to compare D20 rolls against armor classes or whatever.
For me, it's not about making it bland, but making it focused on the gameplay I enjoy and how I envision a d&d rpg. See it as an opportunity - maybe you'll discover the pleasure of planning tactics and strategy based on limited resources(if Larian or any other developer figures out a nice way to balance short/long rests and encounter design).
I guess you won't but hey, we all advocate for the kind of game we ourselves would like to see, cause yes, for your information, I'm a pc gamer too and have never actually played the tabletop. Also, even if the current tutorial indeed can be improved, if it tells you how to use the environment to your advantage, or the game gives you an abundance with opportunities to do that...can you really say you're thinking outside the box after that?
And yes, it is 2021. The wheel has already been invented, we don't need to do it again and pc games don't need be inventive or quirky to catch my interest.
Maybe they don't have to be, but I wonder:
How clunky would KotoR had been if it had played exactly like BG? FO 1 and 2 did, but Bethesda went a different direction with F0 3 and 4, and Obsidian as well with FO NV.
I can't imagine trying to play Oblivion, or Skyrim in the same manner as BG, since the environments were as much a part of the game as the characters in them.
As an aside, if you've never played Table Top, how do you know if this game, or any other cRPG DnD game, is even close to the rules, because someone said so? I mean, one of the common arguments when I was last active here was "but exploding barrels", as if Larian invented them in DoS. It's not like there's been a Grease spell in DnD for a very long time or anything... Wait, there has been. It's been flammable too. It's not like it doesn't have practical advantages in Table Top as well, where I have actually played, and actually used it tactically. I once linked to a video of Outside Xtra and Outside Xbox playing 5e, where they had a really fun scenario play out with Grease, and Spike Trap.
The thing about "cheese mechanics" is that yes, they are available, but they are not required. The encounter listed in the OP here, as an example, I scouted the area, noticed that I could take out some of them really fast with a bow shot, and a push, and did just that. I didn't need a tutorial, or a "Let's Play" to figure it out, I scouted it out with my rogue, and went for it. Is it cheese, or taking advantage of the environment? Some could argue cheese, and some could argue a clever use of the environment, and neither would be wrong, it's just a matter of perspective. Now, if I'd stacked up 500 barrels... Another thing about Cheese Mechanics is that one is perfectly capable of creating them w/out using environmental objects, Grease, and potions that will ignite, or even Spike Trap, as just one example, there are plenty more, all within the actual spells and abilities available to characters within the rules.
I'm just struggling with the idea of "make it more like DnD" from someone that's never played DnD to know how far removed it actually is, or isn't, from what's possible in a Table Top campaign.
