Advantage/Disadvantage Impressions

[Quixoticelixir]

So, its been a while since the launch of the playtest, and while the whole advantage/disadvantage mechanic was initially celebrated by a lot of people, I've found several posts on various forums and blogs that criticize the mechanic for bringing nothing to the table but an additional layer of complexity.

So I was wondering, what's your take on the mechanic? Also, if you dislike it, do you believe that it could somehow be fixed to fit your preferences better?

 

[Agamon]

Not sure how it adds complexity. Modifiers for rolls vs DCs have been in the game for years, this actually simplifies that.

I still like the mechanic, and think it's better than figuring out off-the-cuff modifiers for everything.

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

Played as written, I don't think it adds more complexity than adding modifiers to rolls -- in fact if you have two d20s in hand it's probably easier. But if folks don't like it, it's easy to substitute +2 advantage, -2 disadvantage.

The folks talking about wanting to do advantage/disadvantage stacking (e.g. 3 advantages + 2 disadvantages = advantage) are headed for excessive complexity, though.

 

[Herremann the Wise]

I think it's an excellent mechanic, in that it neatly alters the probability spectrum while leaving the range of possible results unchanged. This fits in very neatly with the aim of compressing the mathematics of the core mechanic. In itself, the mechanic is simple but it certainly can be used as a foundation for more advanced/interesting/complex mechanics and actions.

I could imagine a critical hits rule module utilizing the mechanic for greater granularity. An "advanced" critical hit could be one that can only be achieved when the attacker has advantage (and thus rolling two dice). If both dice are above a certain number, then an "advanced" critical hit is scored. For example, if a longsword attacker has advantage and both dice come up 16 or better, then they score a critical hit. If one of the dice is a 20, then an additional critical effect manifests. You can then vary the minimum numbers to represent the potential lethality of the weapon.

Just an idea.

Best Regards
Herremann the Wise

 

[drothgery]

I'm not a fan of widely-applied reroll mechanics because the probability math on rerolls is complicated (which means almost no one will do it, and you will get weird effects because of this down the line if not in the core rules), and because any time you roll more dice you take more time.

 

[Gargoyle]

My players and I find it fun, and mathematically it feels right. The net bonus is significant enough to be felt without being overpowered. It doesn't take much more time.

Love it, and using it my 4e game.

 

[Dedekind]

On the one hand, I really like the simplicity. A/D can be quickly applied, intuitively understood, but avoids a +1 arms race. This definitely addresses some issues from prior editions. I also like that most conditions can be replaced with "gives A/D + flavorful other stuff." So, BLINDED = "disadvantage + full cover." Or whatever.

On the other hand, I have concerns about implementation. How common will players have A/D? Will it erase more flavorful constraints? If I'm rolling Max or Min 2d20 all the time does it "feel" like D&D?

Generally, I'm positive about it and I'm glad they put it out there. I'm interested to see how the guidance changes in future playtests.

 

[Dedekind]

My players and I find it fun, and mathematically it feels right. The net bonus is significant enough to be felt without being overpowered. It doesn't take much more time.

Love it, and using it my 4e game.

Oh yeah, I forgot to add that I LOVE that the bonus is significant. Nothing like receiving +1/+2 and then beating/blowing the required number by 5 or more.

 

[Alarian]

In theory I like it. My big concern is going to be are players going to spend all their time trying anything under the sun to get advantage. If the rules are such that it doesn't become something the players expect to get regularly but is more of a "WOOT! I have advantage this round!" type of thing I think it will be a good addition to the game.

With combats, at least initially, being a lot faster, I don't want to be spending a lot of time adjudicating whether or not some has or should have advantage or disadvantage every round.

 

[Morrus]

Played as written, I don't think it adds more complexity than adding modifiers to rolls -- in fact if you have two d20s in hand it's probably easier. But if folks don't like it, it's easy to substitute +2 advantage, -2 disadvantage.

The folks talking about wanting to do advantage/disadvantage stacking (e.g. 3 advantages + 2 disadvantages = advantage) are headed for excessive complexity, though.

I really don't see 3-2=1 as being "complex"; and certainly not more so than adding two or three modifies to a dice roll.

I can see arguments against stacking advantage based on the fact that the math might not wind up with the probability curve we'd ideally want; I can't really comprehend arguments that it's in some way complex, though, let alone too complex.

Nah. Stacking them might lead to some odd results, but it doesn't lead to complexity. It leads to counting. Like on Sesame Street.