Originally Posted by GM4Him
Nah, what puts me off most isn't Larian's creativity. It's deviating so extremely from FR lore, D&D rules, etc.

I love Larian's creativity. I think BG3 is awesome. Do I think it would GREATLY benefit from more true 5e rules and monster stats? Absolutely.

Right now, what we have isn't D&D. It's Items R Us. You don't have proper class distinctions, proper monster abilities and stats and behaviors, and items are king. As long as I have plenty of potions, scrolls that everyone can use, throwing bulbs of brine, and salamis, I can slay minotaurs and spectators and my level 1s can kill a cambion with a flaming sword and 120+ HP. Phase spiders play Misty Step Infinity, teleporting across huge distances and spitting poison, and even if I'm a fighter at level 1, I can easily rez someone from the dead or heal with a scroll or by throwing a potion, and even though I might get a -1 or -2 to my Medicine skill I can easily not only stabilize a party member, I can bring them back into a fight.

I can jump 30 feet across the battlefield over people's heads, shove people as a Bonus and then slash them or vice versa, and let's not forget that if you shove someone just right, you can actually throw them 300+ feet off a cliff. Did it. Swear to God, and so did the Drow I was fighting.

That is what bugs me. Not their creativity. D&D is balanced. BG3 is not, and the homebrew completely strips key elements of D&D down and makes them almost pointless.
Also accurate. Though I'd argue that 5e is not exactly well-balanced, with how you can, for example, multiclass as a monk and a barbarian (something you weren't allowed to do before because of alignment restrictions) and get ridiculous naked AC, or how the rogue basically can use sneak attack without any real setup behind it (you used to need flanking/enemy incapacitation for it to work, and now it's an ally near the enemy/advantage). The advantage/disadvantage system also bugs me greatly, personally, as it dumbs down all the attack vs. AC / spell DC vs. saves calculations to the luck of the roll rather than proper preparation.

The concentration mechanic is also an iffy one - with Solasta being a great example in that department. As a druid, do I want to maintain a Moonbean/Flaming Sphere to do tons of extra damage, or have barkskin, which is rendered null by having a decent armor and Dexterity (although I suspect that Solasta doesn't implement it right, because shouldn't it actually stack with armor?)? As a cleric, would I rather add a measly 1d4 to the allies' rolls, or have something like Spirit Guardians active? Why would having Flight on basically limit my wizard/sorcerer to being a damage-dealing turret? It really narrows one's options down, in my opinion. I understand why it's there (to prevent having 10+ spells active at once, leading to Pathfinderesque bloat), but there already were mechanics in place to differentiate bonus types so that you have to know what you're casting and whether or not it'll apply in the first place. I guess today's "target audience" has to be as broad as possible, but I liked my numbers and complexity.