I agree with all the points made by the OP. There is definitely something weird about playing BG3 set in a D&D setting but getting most of the distinctly D&D flavor wrong.
Originally Posted by RagnarokCzD
This game was never suppose to be litteral transcript of tabletop rules, as Swen told us multiple times in countless occasions ... Some people still presumed it will be. :-/ I feel for them, but that will be probably all. :-/
I hope someone will create proper DnD mod fo you tho.
Then this game shouldn't have been called "Baldur's Gate 3" since that is moreso what BG 1 & 2 were with some exceptions.
So you endorse those exceptions, but take exception to them here. Which begs the question, were they really all that close, or is it the rose colored glasses phenomena? I mean, there's a Red Dragon in BG 1, with a max character level of 7. Should be lunch time for the dragon every time, right? How many GMs were giving away explosive arrows to a level 1 party? I don't even remember if they were actually in TT for 2e, not that that means anything, all things considered on my end, since I can't even remember what, or if, I had dinner last night.
What I do know is that the game we're playing in EA now isn't the same as the game we played when EA launched, and I expect that there will be more changes before we get close, and even more changes afterwards. This based on what happened, anecdotally, with DOS 2's EA.
