Bit of a divergence between Swen’s perception of the game and how people play it usually.
He says do first playthrough as Tav and then new story and context through origin, but in DOS2, playing custom was just all around worse than playing Origin. You play origin with a party of 4, you have 4 sources of plot hooks and encounters scattered throughout the Acts, like the caravan for Red Prince only responding if he is in party. Sacrifice one slot and you have a custom with 3 plot hook sources. Also fewer dialogue options and less flavor. What then of Tav? Do we devote a whole playthrough to a less full experience so we are wowed in subsequent playthroughs?
He mentioned not “missing content” because the reactivity is so diverse. Not my experience in DOS2. If he were talking about DOS2, I would imagine every point to be a rationalisation.
The only way I can make this work is if BG3 is unfathomably wider in its permutations and play diversity that every way through is truly different than another.
I would not hold DOS2 as an example of what to expect in BG3 at all. BG3 is a vastly larger and far more reactive game by orders of magnitudes. DOS2 was made by a team of ~50 people...BG3 was made by ~400 people.
Personally I don't care to play as most of the origins in BG3 but I do intend my first playthrough to be as Dark Urge, and at some point I will want to play as Astarion just to see that evil ending he can have with Shadowheart that Swen mentioned. At any rate...this is game has vastly more story and content than DOS2, I wouldn't worry that much about playing only with origin characters.
