WELL, even BALDURS GATE 2, the PRIOR GAME of the series has more classes/kits. My point being it is still disappointing that there are so few options to choose from this <<<D^D game>>> (and it is different in so many Larian ways).
I dont care about <technicalities> like Pathfinder isnt D^D so its ok? or Pathfinder is a sequel its ok? Thats just an excuse for poor content inclusion. BG3 is VERY CLOSELY based on DOS2 so no excuse there. Its not a game built from scratch.
The graphics are great, class content is poor and looks to stay that way. Instead of having barrels, dipping, surfaces mechanics (stuff not really D^D) they couldn't of added some more interesting classes ? ? At least TONS more kits, not so hard to do. Add advantages/disadvantages.
My friend, I see you here, and I oft wonder why you stay around. You seem displeased with the game immensely, and I believe that it does not make you happy. Baldur's Gate 2 used a different system, as well. And, as is often toted, this product is in Early Access. Many classes and subclasses from the PHB have yet to be implemented, but Larian has said they will upon full release. If I'm calculating correctly, there will be 12 classes and 40 subclasses (Or kits as you call them) in the full game. While there are admittedly more in Pathfinder, they're including all of the base PHB 5e classes. In BG2, they used the classes from 2e, and in PF:WotR, they're using classes from Pathfinder. They're all based on different TTRPGs. BG3 isn't based on DOS2, it's based on BG3. While it borrows elements from DOS2, it's a different game. You're comparing apples to oranges to pears to plums here, my friend. You're right, it's not built from scratch. They're basing it on the latest version of DnD instead of the one made by an entirely different company 12 years ago.
