D&D 5E Advantage / Disadvantage in 5e

[Nebulous]

This is why DM fiat is a wonderful thing. If it's obvious that someone is at disadvantage 6 times over, a single slight advantage might not be able to negate it (or vise versa), if I were running the game.

And that's what i would do as well. Goshdarn we are *powerful*

 

[Grazzt]

It just needs a more compact name, damnit. Typing "Advantage/Disadvantage" every time gets annoying

Adv/Dis
A/D
Ad/Ds

 

[Xodis]

It just needs a more compact name, damnit. Typing "Advantage/Disadvantage" every time gets annoying

Call it "A/Dvantage"

 

[Nebulous]

A/D

 

[Li Shenron]

I thought that if you had equal advantages and disadvantages they cancel, but if you have a majority of either then that is what you roll. Having 4 advantages and 1 disadvantage doesnt give you 3 advantages or 3 extra dice with your roll, you only ever get 1 dice to roll regardless of how many advantages/disadvantages you may have. Could be wrong, cant wait to see the rules myself.

Fortunately it is a very easy house rule. I guess I can foresee situations where a large number of bonuses would be offset by a single penalty, and vice versa, multiple penalties negated by a single advantage. And while certainly simpler, i don't personally mind adding/subtracting here and there. I don't even think it would come up that often. Again, i have not playtested the rules as written yet, so i'm not changing anything until i see how it pans out.

The non-stacking rule of (dis)advantage works fine under the assumption that the game doesn't offer a ton of sources of advantage.

For example, while sometimes it has been speculated that the DM can grant advantage as a reward for a nice idea or exquisite description, IIRC the playtest rules advised against this, and tell to grant advantage only when there is a specific rule (action, spell, class ability etc.) that explicitly grants advantage.

Of course, powergamers could always find a way to get 3-4 advantages to the same action, especially once splatbooks enter the fray. The default rule discourages that, but a gaming group who likes that playstyle could easily house rule stacking (dis)advantage into the game, as you mentioned.

But in general, I think the idea that 100 advantages are negated by 1 disadvantage (and viceversa) was grounded in the idea that you would anyway rarely see more than 1 advantage at all on a single roll. If that's not the case in your game, letting the number of (dis)advantage matter is a sensible HR.

 

[Olfan]

I'll play Devils Advocate for a moment: from experience, if the players are in a tough spot they will do *anything* for an edge in a fight. Rightfully so, and it often rewards clever play. If they collectively tripped a monster, knocked it prone, blinded it, the rogue sneak attacks and the wizard casts an advantage-inducing spell, they would be pretty pissed if the monster "fought defensively" to negate all of that.

To address your devil's advocate, I'd suggest that the reverse is also true. In a desperate moment when all the enemies are surrounding a character who stayed behind to ensure the party's escape, he could be a hero and "fight defensively" as you say. The rules work both ways. Given how you've proposed the situation, it kind of allows anyone a chance to be great, surpassing all the odds to come out ahead (assuming he rolls well anyway).

 

[Nebulous]

To address your devil's advocate, I'd suggest that the reverse is also true. In a desperate moment when all the enemies are surrounding a character who stayed behind to ensure the party's escape, he could be a hero and "fight defensively" as you say. The rules work both ways. Given how you've proposed the situation, it kind of allows anyone a chance to be great, surpassing all the odds to come out ahead (assuming he rolls well anyway).

Yes, that's true and I agree, a desperate hero could fend off attacks. Hell, he's probably going to die anyway, advantage negated or not when he's surrounded by six barbed devils

 

[Grazzt]

Hell, he's probably going to die anyway, advantage negated or not when he's surrounded by six barbed devils

Yep. If not, you're doing it wrong.

 

[Nebulous]

Yep. If not, you're doing it wrong.

I didn't plan it this way, but i found the perfect effing picture right after i posted.

 

[Xodis]

To address your devil's advocate, I'd suggest that the reverse is also true. In a desperate moment when all the enemies are surrounding a character who stayed behind to ensure the party's escape, he could be a hero and "fight defensively" as you say. The rules work both ways. Given how you've proposed the situation, it kind of allows anyone a chance to be great, surpassing all the odds to come out ahead (assuming he rolls well anyway).

This is very true. This kind of steps on the whats better, Fair play or the Narrative question. As a DM I would allow a player in this situation to negate all the negatives to give him a fighting chance, because I always choose the narrative and want characters to be epic. That being said I would NOT allow an enemy to negate all the advantages that a party planned and fought for. Double Standard? Yes, but it works for us and makes for a great story.