As far as I know, WotC rarely contradicts itself lorewise in an edition? Like things change in between editions, the lore is different between 4e and 5e for example (like 4e allows gnolls to be civilized while 5e basically made em always fiendish feral), but during an edition things don't contradict often (or atleast I can't think of any moments). Things can massively change, and sometimes new things are revealed, but WotC doesn't mess up their lore in a set.
Also people talking about how a level 18 mage is a CR12 enemy is why I said they don't follow player rules too closely. CR isn't completely tied to level and things can be a little loose. I will admit the MM is not the thing I am most knowledgeable about, I mostly pay attention to what I can summon. However, something I noticed is Cr doesn't match levels and often times Monsters have something that is different for them that makes them special in a fight against a player, sometimes it is innate spellcasting or recharged abilities or something strange, so to me a singular enemy having more spell slots than normal is ok if not every enemy has that. It becomes a problem when every enemy deviates from the base of players in the same way because it then becomes predictable and arguably unfair/unfun.
Yes lore from edition to edition is mostly what I mean. So far recently in 5e Wotc has taken interest in changing things in different way's. Like for example the new Dark Alliance is 5e technically but is nothing like table top or even previous Dark alliance games. It is it's own thing. An attempt to modernize to grab an a particular audience. Bg3 seems to be exactly the same concept. Modernize and capture the Larian audience. The difference is that the dnd crowd want in on this game but hate Larian designs lol.
Another example is tasha's custom rules. They are trying hard to turn dnd into a flexible franchise where much of the core right down to your very character can be customized. I'm not suprised that Larian's version of a campaign is experimental. The only thing that suprised me was how stubborn, rude, rigid, and arrogant the dnd online crowd is. You'd think after a table or two people would learn to be flexible.
To me EA is in flux. If enemies have more spell slots then mage slayer will be op, counter spell will be more op, jump/longstrider will be very useful, etc. Nothing is set in stone so complaining till you are blue in the face seems pointless. Larian's past EA's don't exactly spring confidence either.
I am only on my side. The side that simply looks at the game and won't make a concrete opinion till release. I'll make observations at most from time to time. If something bothers me I'll make a suggestion and move on. I won't waste time like this Niara person. Their are more exciting things to do with my time now. Have a nice day.
