Random thought on advantage/disadvantage.

[B.T.]

Haven't played yet so can't say how this would work out in practice (depends on how often advantage/disadvantage comes around), but I'm thinking the following might be nifty.

• 2+ (net) sources of advantage is an auto-success unless you roll a 1.
• 2+ (net) sources of disadvantage is an auto-failure unless you roll a 20.

Thoughts?

 

[Traken]

Nope. Entirely too much time would be taken up trying to come up with any advantage or mitigating disadvantages.

What do you mean I auto-fail when trying to walk across the rigging of a ship in 50' waves in a storm while having arrows shot at me? I have a 10' pole to balance, I'm wearing ballet shoes, and I have a background as a circus performer!

 

[slobster]

If you're keeping track of separate sources of advantage and applying a cumulative advantage, I would just stack them on top of each other. So with two sources of advantage you'd be rolling three dice and taking the best, and so on. It accomplishes a scaling effect that is more granular, but as far as I can tell no more annoying to keep track of, than your example.

There's another thread around somewhere with some math about how such a system would play out.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

just did the math.

advantage means a +5 bonus if you had a 50% chance to hit and it is usually +3 to +4

allowing more rerolls will get you up to near 100% very fast. You could just give autohit on 3rd advantage.