D&D 5E "The problem with 5e" is the best feature - advantage

[Ancalagon]

The reason why I don't stack Advantage is because trying to get multiple versions of it does one thing that I don't want to see... which is slow the game down.

Whether it's a whole heap of +1s and +2s from the 3EPF games... or multiple Advantages in 5E... they both result in the same thing: Players spend inordinate amounts of time looking for and discussing with the other players all the different ways to gain and milk the bonuses. If there was a list of 50 ways to get Advantage and having multiple ones stacked... we'd see every player spend their turn running down the giant list trying to find all the different ones to try and grab. All just to make it more likely you hit on your turn (and/or crit on your turn.) But the game already make the chance to hit quite generous, so the need to make it more and more likely seems unnecessary to me.

So, first of all, what you are describing IS a real problem. I play in a pathfinder game. In our last battle, my chances to hit were base +11 (due to a number of static factors that were pre-calculated, this is all good)... but then modified by 6-8 factors (reduce, haste, 2 types of bardic bonuses, bless, point blank range AND range penatly, firing into melee, the Mutagen... I think that's it). These variable bonuses changed each round and absolutely slow the game down.

However, if you look at the solution I proposed, there is a big diminishing return for more advantages stacked on top.
(the math: 1 advantage is equivalent to +3.5, two advantage is 4.47, three advantage is a bit more... but it can't ever be more than +6. ) So really, hunting for more than 2-3 advantage isn't worth it. In essence, a system that is intermediate in complexity.

 

[Eventhorrizon]

So people have been grumbling about 5e.

(tl,dr: advantage is great! but it has consequences - the players engage less. A proposal to fix it)

I think 5e is a good game. But like all versions of D&D, it's not perfect. Compromises had to be made (I consider it "medium crunch" and I am happy with the level of complexity, but for some it's too complex, for others not enough). Some new rules had unintended consequences - the "sort rest classes vs long rest classes" balance depends on the pacing of the game, which is strange and frustrating. There is no longer a "magical item market" where you could customize your magical gear - some see this as a good thing (I do!) and some see it as bad. Some say that the game is too easy, that the PCs are too tough (a valid criticism I think).

However, the advantage/disadvantage system was almost universally praised. And it is good! It was a bit... much... at times in the older editions.

This is an example from the PF game (the kingmaker AP where I play an alchemist)

"My starting to hit number is +9, but there are modifiers. I have drunk the mutagen, which gives me +4 to dex, which means +2 to hit. I've also cast reduce, which increases my attack by 1 and gives me 2 more dex so another +1. The foe is 25 feet away so point-blank shot kicks in, giving me another +1, BUT there is a -2 range penalty. The bard is signing that's +5 right? (our bards is *awesome) - nope the bard is more than 30 feet away from me, reducing the bonus to +3. I'm also firing into melee (-4) and there is some cover (-2) so that's not great... but wait I'm hasted by the sorcerer, so I get another +1! So now it 9 +4 +1 +1 +1 -2 +3 -4 -2 + 1= +12 (... I think)... vs touch attack armor"

And this changes every round! I take just take dex damage, or been hit by a debuff? did range changes, is cover less (or more), did a buffing spell expire, the bard stopped signing, etc etc etc."

Advantage sweeps almost all of this away. With very few exception like cover, in most situations you have advantage (roll twice take the best), normal chances of success, or disadvantage (roll twice take the worse). This ended the constant re-calculations of bonuses changing from round to round. It made the game faster and easier. Some people prefer the complexity of 3e/PF, but for a lot it made the game better.

But some of the discontent about 5e was more... nebulous. Some blamed the "Mercer Effect". Others that the game didn't "feel" right.

Recently, I saw this video about 5e being like super-heroes and how the character's power all came from their sheet and that the rewards of engaging with the world were less - you could just use your "own" power to win. Now this video wasn't quite 100% right. You still need the other PCs IMO. And it didn't quite explain why you didn't need to "engage" anymore.

But that video made me realize what the issue is - it's advantage! Once you have advantage, getting more help doesn't matter. (I know that there are other bonuses you can get, but they are rare).

You don't need to find the higher grounds. You don't need to flank the giant. Just get advantage by doing one thing and you're good. And a lot of classes have ways to easily give themselves or others advantage. So you don't need to engage with the world as much! Just show up, and get ready to rumble!

So... how do we fix this?

First, Advantage is not a 2nd d20 roll. It's a +1d6 bonus. This is roughly the same as advantage (advantage is equivalent to +5 if you have 50% chance of hitting. If your chances are very low or very high, the impact is less. So +1d6 is roughly equivalent).

Second advantages stack - you could get more than a d6. But for things not to get completely crazy, (good or bad: disadvantage stacks too!), the extra D6 don't add, it's a "take the highest roll". So if you have advantage from 3 sources, one source of disadvantage, roll the 1d6 twice, take the best, and add this to your 1d20 roll. So if you have a lot of advantages, the bonus will approach +6 - so engaging with the world to make a fight go easier on you and harder on the enemy is worth doing.

Am I on to something?

You cant have it both ways. Want to count every individual factor in an attack and do the math? Thats the Path finder way. Want to siplify it to advantage or disadvantage? Thats the 5e way. I dont think there is a perfect middle ground, anything that tries to account for all factors will end up like pathfinder, anything that tries to simplify will end up like 5e. If you want to replace advantage with a d6 system go ahead but there is no perfect answer.

The question is not wich path is best, but wich to you prefer. TTRPGs can only do so many things at once. Find the way you want to play it and do that and dont look back. I like advantage and disadvantage because they are fast and easy to explain. I have no interest in making dnd slower and will sacrifice complexity for pacing in aheart beat. I also find granular systems very arbitrary and people are bound to forget certain factors from one round to anther so enforcing difficult rules that wont be consistently enforced (and realistically cant be when you get to granular) to be a futile exercise. But some people love to play a numbers game and if thats what they enjoy more power to them.

I would ask what exactly is it you dont like about advantage and disadvantage? then how do you fix it? If the d6 system you suggest does it for you go for it, I think you will end up a variation of path finder were players will argue for any minor advantage they can get, but maybe you find that enjoyable. It can be fun to stack up big numbers but I still dont personally think its worth the hit to pacing.

 

[loverdrive]

If you're going to allow advantage to stack, I see no reason to cap it at 3.

Cherrypicking all the d6s for sneak attacks and d8s for smites is already pain in the ass enough, and I don't think 4 or 5 d20 would fit in my hands ¯\(ツ)/¯

Other than that, there's surely no reason. Difference between 4d20k1 and 3d20k1 is negligible.

 

[Bacon Bits]

Other than that, there's surely no reason. Difference between 4d20k1 and 3d20k1 is negligible.

In every sense except ability to crit. That's the most tangible benefit of more d20s.

1d20 = 5%
2d20 = 9.75%
3d20 = 14.26%
4d20 = 18.54%

It tapers off, but it's pretty gradual. You've got to get close to 30 dice before additional dice don't improve your odds of a crit by 1%.

 

[Ancalagon]

You cant have it both ways. Want to count every individual factor in an attack and do the math? Thats the Path finder way. Want to siplify it to advantage or disadvantage? Thats the 5e way. I dont think there is a perfect middle ground, anything that tries to account for all factors will end up like pathfinder, anything that tries to simplify will end up like 5e. If you want to replace advantage with a d6 system go ahead but there is no perfect answer.


I would ask what exactly is it you dont like about advantage and disadvantage?

Why not - there is such a thing as "the middle path". In fact, I would point out that in some ways, 5e is an example of a middle path. It's far simpler than pathfinder, but it's much more complex than the GLOG or Troika!, for example. So trying to simplify things don't have to end up like 5e. You can go far simpler.

As far as what I don't like - read my OP!

 

[Vyshan]

If I ran 5e, I'd have Advantage/Disadvantage give +2/-2 and stack. Done. Math is not so hard or so onerous that the game should be as afraid of it as it is.

Things are still streamlined as there's no outlier numbers, just 2's.

Doesn't help with the fact that this 'streamlining' has hogged basically all the design space in buffs and debuffs, but limited design space is apparently part of the point.

I like it on a surface level, gives more emphasis to finding ways to get/give a/d instead of just a reroll. Like simple example is giving an enemy disadvantage on their next saving throw, thats a -2 which can be just enough for a caster player to get their spell to work the way they want it to. Can't speak of what shenanigans dms or players might find that makes a simple concept like this potentially back breaking though.

 

[Neonchameleon]

Yep, those all make sense for the board game part of D&D. And for those of you who really enjoy the tactics of the D&D board game, finding ways to incentivize the engagement with the board game makes all the sense in the world.

For me they make sense for the reality of the world of D&D and enhancing the shared visualisation by making it matter. And make other forms of D&D feel like acting against a green screen. What you call "the board game" I call the tabletop roleplaying - and if I wanted almost pure improv I wouldn't bother with using multiple 300 page books weighing me down (I also play both Fate and Apocalypse World which do that far better). What I never ever want slowing me down is actively having to look things up in the rulebook which is when for me things break.

 

[DEFCON 1]

For me they make sense for the reality of the world of D&D and enhancing the shared visualisation by making it matter.

I guess I just have differing needs for describing the reality of the world... because D&D mechanics do a pretty poor job of it in my opinion. I mean hit points alone have seen millions of sentences written talking about how piss-poor they are to describe any sense of "reality" for mimicking body function, stamina, or injury. And that's just one of the thousands of mechanics we have to play the board game of D&D that have that problem.

The mechanics are great for playing the board game, but couldn't define any rational sense of reality if its life depended on it as far as I'm concerned.

 

[BrokenTwin]

I greatly prefer Shadow of the Demon Lord's boons & banes system, which as previously noted is nearly identical to the system proposed in the OP. It's a fantastic mid-point between D&D 5E's system and earlier editions. System is super easy to work with (boons and banes cancel out on a one to one basis, keep the highest number rolled), and includes the ability to sacrifice extra boons to do cool stuff like adding tripping or shoving to your attack.
... Which makes the proclaimations that "It can't be done!" extra amusing because it's already been done, and it works fantastically.
Do I think the boon/bane system would slot easily into D&D 5E? With just a bit of elbow grease, yeah. Probably be easier on the system to just let Advantage and Disadvantage stack. Sure it will make crits more likely, but honestly, that feels more like a feature than a detriment. A reward for stacking the deck in your favour.
Having said that, I'd still prefer SotDL's boon/bane system, whose smaller impact allows the GM to more freely distribute both bonuses and penalties in a way that's still easily understood by the player.