I'm a bit tiered of looking at posts or YT vids saying how BG3 has this rule that would make DnD 5e so much better! Or hey we should have this rule for 5e from BG3! I want my character to do X like in BG3. They want to give players a swiss army knife so they have more than just a simple hammer. But if every problem is a nail, what's the point?

I am of the opinion that combat in 5e is the weakest part of the game, I enjoy the roleplay much more. As an optimizer I like coming up with weird builds that, while not the strongest possible, are different while still being an addition to the team (no quirky 6 STR barbarian). I do this because I like expanding on the limited player-side options of 5e. I want more choices to make. But what if I had choices to make without player-side options?

When I saw Larian was using 5e rules for BG3 I was at first disappointed. I liked the "ruleset" DOS1 and 2 much more. But I had a blast playing BG3. Why? Why if I'm way more limited than on DOS or Pathfinder WotR do I enjoy combat? Is it because I have lots of oils and potions? No, I never use them (I have to save them for the final boss of NG ). Is it because I can do 2 extra damage once per short rest? Not really, and at higher levels they have so little impact I forget to use them. The answer is the encounters and enemies.

Encounters in BG3 arent just a pack of wolves or some random creatures from an encounter table. They are specifically chosen for the situation and map. They rarely repeat themselves, they have unique mechanics. Many times they force you to engage with those mechanics. They start simple just some imps or goblins, but soon they grow into interesting mini setpieces. Enemies that frighten everyone around them so you cant move your party and need to think how to win while inmobile. Enemies that take cover so your spellcasters have to close the gap. NPCs to be protected. Enemies revealed only by bright light. Portals that bring out enemies if left alone. Enemies that drop objects that have to be interacted with before the end of the round. Objects that can be interacted with to gain an advantage. A round time limit. A combination of them.

Even if you're a champion fighter or bear barbarian with few player-side options, BG3 is very rich on the game-side of things. The game forces you to make many choices, despite having limited options as a player. That is what makes the game engaging. Think about another popular videogame like Elden Ring, if you're a fighter and have no spells, your options are an ash of war, 2 attacks, jump and roll. But since the bosses have such unique attacks and animations it's still engaging. The player side of things might not be very interesting, but the enemie side is VERY interesting.

This retains the 5e issue of "is there a problem? well, the DM should fix it!". But don't try to make modifications to the system when the main reason you enjoy BG3 is not the system, but the situations you're in.

TL;DR: Instead of implementing more player-side options into 5e, implement more enemy-side options that gives and forces the players to make more meaningful choices in combat. That is what makes something engaging. There is no point giving a swiss knife to someone with a hammer if everything is a nail.