I looked up a few and i think you can see the Ability Scores in BG3 Wiki. At least of some of them.
This gave me pause. The ability scores of some NPCs are way over the top. Look up kahga or better, examine Gekh. Even if those are NPCs they should at least be somewhere near the possiblities the Races give. Having a lvl 5 Duergar with 18,18,16,14,14,12 or something like that would make him some kind of uber Dwarf.
Kagha is nearly the same.
While i do not think the battles too hard it still feels like an unfair advantage. I downloaded some mods to go that way and the battles got ridicoulously easy. I always hated having a games difficulty based sorely on enemy strenght. Nothing tactical about that.
A stat spread like that is basically nearing Pathfinder-level bullshit.
One of the things that struck me while playing Solasta (and tabletop) is that most enemies usually had at least one or two stats that were either at 10 or below for negative modifiers. The point of this was to give players an alternate way to deal with them if smashing their faces in wasn't working out (or you needed a way to enable doing it faster).
For example, there was one fight in Solasta that involved a hit and run crossbow rogue or something, and they'd always attack you from the maximum possible range. Your melee would be occupied with the main force attacking a friendly NPC that you have to save, while this fool was pelting your back line from the opposite side of the map. If you sent your melee after him, it'd usually take like 2 turns of dashing to get to them. But it turns out they had a -1 modifier to wisdom saves, so Hold Person would typically shut them down immediately.
