I thought Larian's whole approach was to allow players to play (and enjoy) the game however they want. I strongly favor melee combat over everything else including especially spellcasting. Why is that "playing badly"?
Generally the idea of tactical combat (and especially turn-based one) is to encourage well... tactical decision making. Though if that's not self explanatory then I understand why TB come from - bad combat is easier to ignore if it plays by itself. Bum rushing an enemy on a higher ground, with advantage, with all party members, with one units far ahead of others, hoping for RNG to smile you you... I think it would be an insult to not be punished for that.
With what seems like a wide range of utility items (like smoke arrows and such) I hope BG3 would allow for range of interesting strategies even with physical combat oriented party.
You haven't addressed my point at all. All you're saying here is: melee combat = playing badly. And I utterly reject that.
Larian's gaming philosophy says the player can kill any NPC in the game and still move forward within the game and complete any quest or goal. And yet, if a player chooses to favor melee over everything else in how they handle combat encounters, that's where Larian draws their line and says to the player: no, you can't do that, and we're going to punish you for it? Seems entirely arbitrary, cussed even (though I will admit I'm not completely sure that's what Larian intends for the game, versus whether it's just your interpretation of Larian's approach to combat).
There is no line I can see. Larian aren’t saying you can’t do that, but that doesn’t mean they have to make it easy for you either.
If you want to play with no ranged attacks, give it a go and see how viable it is, but accept that you’ll need to close the distance with enemies who maybe hard to reach. That’s what melee combat means after all.