D&D 5E Reflecting on advantage and disadvantage.

[Evenglare]

So now that 5e has been out a long while what do you think about the A/D mechanic? Originally I absolutely adored it, but when I began playing more and more it seemed like the concept is a bit too... homogenized I guess is the best word. Since they did away with the +2/-2 as the DM rule and replaced it with A/D I'll be the first to admit that it simplified book keeping and that was a very good thing. However there's a key part of that which is the + and -s, not necessarily the number itself, the fact that you can stack +/-2s. A/D mechanics basically makes it impossible to stack. Despite the fact that stacking +-2's can open the door to some heavy power gaming, A/D doesn't allow for a gradation of rewards on the PCs part. I'm specifically talking about DM adjudication, no specific powers that grant A/D.

Unless I missed something, it seems like no matter how many advantages you have just ONE disadvantage will negate pretty much all of that advantage you built up. Which means that preparing heavily to take down some crazy monster or something can be pointless if the monster has anything that would grant disadvantage. That being said I totally understand how doing a 1/1 match for cancellation can lead to a scenario where the PCs almost can't fail or can't succeed if you have ... say 5 advantage dice. Thoughts on the subject? Am I being too harsh thinking that it can take away meaning of well prepared PCs? Like I said, I don't necessarily hate the mechanic and I understand why it's implemented, I just think that we have sacrificed a bit more than we had bargained for when wanting a simpler edition.

 

[Psikerlord#]

I think Adv/Disad is good, but also too blunt to be your only modifier.

We regularly use +1 to +3 as well. And indeed also combine those with adv/disad. The old DMs friend of +/-2 gets plenty of work in our game.

This is not without precedent, as half cover gives +2, rather adv/disad

So for example if someone has a semi relevant background, might get +2 on a check rather than adv/disad or prof. Or we give +1 for flanking. That sort of thing.

 

[Imaculata]

This is one of the reasons I'm sticking with 3.5th edition. I think the advantage/disadvantage system helps reduce all the number juggling that has always plagued D&D. But its a shame if you already have advantage, and a party member does something that doesn't stack with the advantage that you already have. I'd rather stick with +2 and +3.

 

[delericho]

I think it's great, but I do think it has a couple of weaknesses.

Firstly, I think they've made the mistake, again, of introducing a mechanic, noting that it has opened up a huge design space, and therefore generated a huge number of mechanics to fill that design space - and so there are huge numbers of specific effects and powers that grant advantage or that impose disadvantage.

Secondly, I think it's probably a mistake to make both advantage and disadvantage binary conditions (you have them, or you don't) and to have them cancel one another out.

I suspect a better approach would have instead been to advise the DM to examine the situation, determine whether the circumstances as a whole are exceptionally beneficial (or otherwise) and thus apply either advantage or disadvantage accordingly.

 

[Shiroiken]

Advantage and Disadvantage have worked fine for me, but I normally have them cancel at 1:1. Since I keep the ultimate decision, powergaming has not been an issue.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

I like the simplicity overall. The only numbers I have to deal with are +2 AC/Dex saves for half cover and +5 AC/Dex saves for 3/4 cover. And I have those memorized. That means I never have to look up a general modifier (only specific ones from spells, items, or class features).

...I can give up a lot for that benefit. Sure, sometimes you wish you had finer granularity in one particular situation. Giving an ad hoc +2/-2 once in a blue moon won't hurt anything, but that works better as a DM decision than a codified rule or a chart of situations when it applies.

As far as stacking benefits...honestly, if someone is getting advantage from more than two or three sources at once, they aren't playing the same game that I am.

 

[The Human Target]

I liked it in theory, but in play it's a very blunt tool.

 

[Li Shenron]

So now that 5e has been out a long while what do you think about the A/D mechanic? Originally I absolutely adored it, but when I began playing more and more it seemed like the concept is a bit too... homogenized I guess is the best word. Since they did away with the +2/-2 as the DM rule and replaced it with A/D I'll be the first to admit that it simplified book keeping and that was a very good thing. However there's a key part of that which is the + and ='s. A/D mechanics basically makes it impossible to stack. Despite the fact that stacking +-2's can open the door to some heavy power gaming, it doesn't allow for a gradation of rewards on the PCs part. I'm specifically talking about DM adjudication, no specific powers that grant A/D.

Unless I missed something, it seems like no matter how many advantages you have just ONE disadvantage will negate pretty much all of that advantage you built up. Which means that preparing heavily to take down some crazy monster or something can be pointless if the monster has anything that would grant disadvantage. That being said I totally understand how doing a 1/1 match for cancellation can lead to a scenario where the PCs almost can't fail or can't succeed if you have ... say 5 advantage dice. Thoughts on the subject? Am I being too harsh thinking that it can take away meaning of well prepared PCs? Like I said, I don't necessarily hate the mechanic and I understand why it's implemented, I just think that we have sacrificed a bit more than we had bargained for when wanting a simpler edition.

I've been pointing out the negative quirks of adv/dis since the beginning of the playtest, but most people have been simply too happy for its simplicity, that they refuse to see them.

IMO the non-stacking isn't even the biggest deal with advantage, but rather the fact that (dis)advantage is also a condition that triggers a lot of special abilities, unlike the 3e vanilla +2/-2 modifier that you could always apply to represent various circumstances. Now if you over-use (dis)advantage freely, you have to be prepared that the PCs (and the monsters) will too often be allowed or otherwise prevented to use their special abilities and features.

 

[n0nym]

Advantage/Disadvantage is such a great mechanic that for me it was worth quitting 3.5 / Pathfinder on its own. Combined with Bounded Accuracy and no mandatory magic items, it puts 5e far ahead its predecessors.

In my game, I do the "1 for 1" cancellation trick for Advantage / Disadvantage and it works great. It's such a simple and easy fix that I wonder why people still overthink this whole matter...

 

[Imaculata]

There's certainly elegance in simplicity. But I'm more of the old school of thought. I don't like too much simplicity. I like detail.