Advantage & Disadvantage - Looking for a synopsis

[Ferox4]

After a long hiatus our group has begun playing again. We play 3.5E and never explored 4E, let alone 5E. My renewed interest in playing has prompted me to explore 5E and how the game has evolved. I get the majority of the mechanics in this newest version, however I am a bit perplexed about how Advantage and Disadvantage work - it's very vague in both the PHB & DMG. If there's a thread already posted on the topic I'd appreciate a link (I did search for one, but not exhaustively). Or if someone can give me the in and outs in a reply here that would also be cool. Thanks.

 

[iserith]

If there's advantage on a roll, roll the d20 twice and take the better result. If there's disadvantage, take the lesser result. If you have both advantage and disadvantage on a roll, then you just roll normally no matter how many instances of advantage or disadvantage "stack up."

Usually, a special ability, condition (e.g. prone), or spell will tell you that you have advantage or disadvantage on a roll. In other cases, the DM may say advantage or disadvantage applies to a roll given his or her judgment on the situation.

I would also highly recommend treating 5e (and all versions of D&D really) as not an "evolution" from one game to the next, but entirely separate games. It's easier to learn a new game if you forget what you know about other games in my view.

 

[Henry]

Simply put, advantage or disadvantage is a state imposed on a d20 check -- you either have advantage, disadvantage, or neither and it's a single die throw.

If you have advantage, roll a d20 twice for the check, and take the better number (and then add any other modifiers).
If you have disadvantage, roll a d20 twice for the check, and take the worse number (and then add any other modifiers).

Disadvantage and Advantage cancel one another out. If you have both advantage (NO MATTER HOW MANY CONDITIONS IMPOSE IT) and disadvantage (NO MATTER HOW MANY CONDITIONS IMPOSE IT) then they cancel out and you make a single d20 roll (and then add any other modifiers).

Its purpose as a tool is to make it easier for a DM to give a bonus or penalty without having to fiddle with tons of modifiers.

Example: I have two people trying to lift a heavy log in tandem. The DM decides that this equates to the Help action, and one player rolls the STR check with advantage. They roll 2d20, take the best result, and add their STR modifier.

Example: I have a fighter in chainmail trying to skulk around a quiet warehouse. Chain Mail armor automatically imposes disadvantage. The fighter rolls 2d20, takes the lower number, and adds their DEX modifier.

Example: The fighter is hanging for dear life off a cliff. The cliff is slick (DM rules it imposes disadvantage) but they have a buddy who isn't very strong but is braced and trying to lend them a hand to climb up (They are using the Help action). Because the climb has both advantage and disadvantage, it's instead a single d20 roll plus modifiers.

Make more sense?

 

[Ferox4]

If there's advantage on a roll, roll the d20 twice and take the better result. If there's disadvantage, take the lesser result. If you have both advantage and disadvantage on a roll, then you just roll normally no matter how many instances of advantage or disadvantage "stack up."

Usually, a special ability, condition (e.g. prone), or spell will tell you that you have advantage or disadvantage on a roll. In other cases, the DM may say advantage or disadvantage applies to a roll given his or her judgment on the situation.

I would also highly recommend treating 5e (and all versions of D&D really) as not an "evolution" from one game to the next, but entirely separate games. It's easier to learn a new game if you forget what you know about other games in my view.

Thanks, iserith. Doesn't get much more straightforward than that. I was overthinking it.

Re: Evolution vs. Separate Game - I get what you mean. To me the changes between 1E/2E to 3E and beyond represent more of a paradigm shift (d20 system) than the changes between 3E to the present. YMMV.

 

[Ferox4]

Simply put, advantage or disadvantage is a state imposed on a d20 check -- you either have advantage, disadvantage, or neither and it's a single die throw.

If you have advantage, roll a d20 twice for the check, and take the better number (and then add any other modifiers).
If you have disadvantage, roll a d20 twice for the check, and take the worse number (and then add any other modifiers).

Disadvantage and Advantage cancel one another out. If you have both advantage (NO MATTER HOW MANY CONDITIONS IMPOSE IT) and disadvantage (NO MATTER HOW MANY CONDITIONS IMPOSE IT) then they cancel out and you make a single d20 roll (and then add any other modifiers).

Its purpose as a tool is to make it easier for a DM to give a bonus or penalty without having to fiddle with tons of modifiers.

Example: I have two people trying to lift a heavy log in tandem. The DM decides that this equates to the Help action, and one player rolls the STR check with advantage. They roll 2d20, take the best result, and add their STR modifier.

Example: I have a fighter in chainmail trying to skulk around a quiet warehouse. Chain Mail armor automatically imposes disadvantage. The fighter rolls 2d20, takes the lower number, and adds their DEX modifier.

Example: The fighter is hanging for dear life off a cliff. The cliff is slick (DM rules it imposes disadvantage) but they have a buddy who isn't very strong but is braced and trying to lend them a hand to climb up (They are using the Help action). Because the climb has both advantage and disadvantage, it's instead a single d20 roll plus modifiers.

Make more sense?

Yes, it does. Thanks, man. For whatever reason I was overthinking the mechanic. It does add an easy tool for the DM.

 

[iserith]

Re: Evolution vs. Separate Game - I get what you mean. To me the changes between 1E/2E to 3E and beyond represent more of a paradigm shift (d20 system) than the changes between 3E to the present. YMMV.

If you're used to playing D&D 3.Xe, there are a number of things you'll need to "forget" to make D&D 5e run as well as it could do in my view. Chief among them is you'll have to train your players to not ask to make ability checks and instead describe what they want to do. It's on the DM to decide if some kind of check is appropriate based on what it is described. "Can I make a Use Rope check?" is not the way to go here.

In general, I would say if you ever find yourself going, "I'm not sure how this works in 5e, but in 3e we would..." just stop right there because you'll probably end up being wrong and headed toward a less than ideal play experience.

Good luck! Hope you enjoy the game!

 

[Ferox4]

If you're used to playing D&D 3.Xe, there are a number of things you'll need to "forget" to make D&D 5e run as well as it could do in my view. Chief among them is you'll have to train your players to not ask to make ability checks and instead describe what they want to do. It's on the DM to decide if some kind of check is appropriate based on what it is described. "Can I make a Use Rope check?" is not the way to go here.

Yeah, that was one of things I picked up right off the bat and liked. Skill points are a giant PITA.

In general, I would say if you ever find yourself going, "I'm not sure how this works in 5e, but in 3e we would..." just stop right there because you'll probably end up being wrong and headed toward a less than ideal play experience.

Good luck! Hope you enjoy the game!

HA! Sound advice. Thanks.

 

[Shiroiken]

Re: Evolution vs. Separate Game - I get what you mean. To me the changes between 1E/2E to 3E and beyond represent more of a paradigm shift (d20 system) than the changes between 3E to the present. YMMV.

Something else to consider is that 5E's style is much closer to a return to AD&D in the amount of DM control. A majority of the game is left to the DM to make determinations, rather than trying to have a rule for everything. This means that everything is more fluid, limiting a lot of rules lawyering, but can allow a lot of arguments (unless the DM puts his foot down). This can be a big shift from 3E and 4E players IME.

Final note (unrelated to current topic, but important): 5E was playtested to fit the widest possible player base. That doesn't mean that it's right for you or your group. If you don't enjoy it, there's nothing wrong with staying with 3E or switching to Pathfinder (which was based on 3E mechanics). Hopefully you do enjoy it though!

 

[Ferox4]

Something else to consider is that 5E's style is much closer to a return to AD&D in the amount of DM control. A majority of the game is left to the DM to make determinations, rather than trying to have a rule for everything. This means that everything is more fluid, limiting a lot of rules lawyering, but can allow a lot of arguments (unless the DM puts his foot down). This can be a big shift from 3E and 4E players IME.

Final note (unrelated to current topic, but important): 5E was playtested to fit the widest possible player base. That doesn't mean that it's right for you or your group. If you don't enjoy it, there's nothing wrong with staying with 3E or switching to Pathfinder (which was based on 3E mechanics). Hopefully you do enjoy it though!

Unlikely that our group will make the shift to 5E. We're in our early 50's now, our gaming time is at a premium, and our renewed interest is primarily based on teaching our kids the game (passing the torch). We're very comfortable with 3.5 and still enjoy it, warts and all. We'll see if one of these kids gets the bug and wants to DM in the future. If that happens, I'd like to be somewhat up to speed on the new versions of the game so that I can potentially help/mentor their development.

Sidebar: We were initially concerned about the level of violence in the game when we started playing with the kids (ages range from 10-13). Four sessions in, those kids were rolling die to see which one got to mercilessly kill a bound, Goblin prisoner.

 

[Ferox4]

Something else to consider is that 5E's style is much closer to a return to AD&D in the amount of DM control. A majority of the game is left to the DM to make determinations, rather than trying to have a rule for everything. This means that everything is more fluid, limiting a lot of rules lawyering, but can allow a lot of arguments (unless the DM puts his foot down). This can be a big shift from 3E and 4E players IME.

Yeah, 3rd edition is very heavy on the stacking of bonuses via Feat chains, Skill synergies, Magic bonuses and all sorts of other crap. We played some high level campaigns in 3E - one of which I DMed - and it became absurd, and cumbersome to run and play. It appears to me that 5E might be more playable past level 10 than 3E. It looks like a lot of the PCs "power" comes from gaining levels versus being a munchkin.