*and to simply stop the this is DoS comments. Instead focus on what you feel is wrong*
Avoiding mentioning *those other games Larian made* as being the blueprint from which many of the current issues that alienate 5E enthusiasts come won't make said issues disappear, nor less of an issue.
Player expectations are a driver for player satisfaction, yes? BG3 was advertised as a 5E experience as close to the core rules as possible, just like DnD adaptations of the past had been: As faithful as possible.
I was already worried back when they announced during the early days that they didn't even want to implement the original combat system in the 5E way because they felt "it wouldn't work well in a video game".
Had they ever played BG1+2? Icewind Dale? NWN 1+2? Dark Sun? Pool of Radiance? Any game that had a "core D&D" difficulty setting?
In any case, very glad they stepped back on that, because 5E combat in a video game works just fine as it turns out - and clearly not because they added oil barrels or cantrips with splash effects. So I hope they keep stepping back on these wilder elements inspired by the approach taken in *those other games Larian did*.
There's lots of ways to introduce homebrew where it makes sense: I'm very glad for instance that you can just recast Speak with Dead on a different corpse in BG3, because I feel that kind of thing should be a ritual spell in the first place and not waste spell slots. You know, minor stuff, for quality of life.
You want to make a game adaptation, start with what is there and get the base game right, and work from there. You seem to be saying "don't take 5E PHB as scripture", yeah I get that. But, well, I'm saying: "maybe also don't take the ruleset as some rough guideline to toss away the moment you think you have a better idea". Might as well call BG3 a game "inspired by" Dungeons & Dragons 5E then.
