D&D 5E Adv/Disadv - how often do you use?

[Taliseian]

Ran my first 5E game yesterday (Starter Set) and I see that there are specific instances in the rules (Rogue Sneak Attack for example) that integrate advantages and disadvantages.

Have any DM's been a bit more liberal with their use?

As an example I ran an encounter where an Archer had height over the battlefield (was on the wagon against Goblins), so I awarded the Archer advantage as long as they were on the wagon.

Curious how much or little DM's are using things like this or is this using that system a little too much.

Thanks in advance...


T

 

[LabyrinthLord718]

I think that as long as the core rules do not apply additional bonuses for high ground, I would definitely do the same and give Advantage to the player. I wouldn't give advantage if they were also getting a +2 to hit, however.

I am hoping that 5th keeps alive the spirit of DM fiat and we don't have another system with every possible edge case requiring its own rule...

 

[transtemporal]

Our DM is very generous with advantage for unimportant rolls, like using a climbing kit to climb up a short cliff or gathering information in a city you're familiar with, but he's more cautious in combat since its very powerful. The "higher ground" wouldn't have qualified, I don't think. Basically, any situation that would've given less than +4 bonus in an old edition doesn't provide advantage in our game.

I like that its up to each individual DM though, thats cool.

 

[LabyrinthLord718]

Our DM is very generous with advantage for unimportant rolls, like using a climbing kit to climb up a short cliff or gathering information in a city you're familiar with, but he's more cautious in combat since its very powerful. The "higher ground" wouldn't have qualified, I don't think. Basically, any situation that would've given less than +4 bonus in an old edition doesn't provide advantage in our game.

I like that its up to each individual DM though, thats cool.

This sounds ... stingy to me. Advantage, to me, is a narrative/dramatic device with a mechanical side effect.
By only allowing it for 'unimportant' rolls ... I dunno, that just doesn't sound like fun.
To me, the point of [ad/disad]vantage is to pump up the drama.
Like you say, it is (for now) left up to DM fiat and I hope it stays that way.
At my table, I would allow open discussion if a player feels they deserve advantage; same goes with Inspirations.
(So long as the players understand that DM has final say)

 

[transtemporal]

This sounds ... stingy to me. Advantage, to me, is a narrative/dramatic device with a mechanical side effect.
By only allowing it for 'unimportant' rolls ... I dunno, that just doesn't sound like fun.
To me, the point of [ad/disad]vantage is to pump up the drama.

Advantage effectively has the opposite effect though. It pumps up your chances of success so much, it takes the jeopardy out of a roll.

Is it fun? Definitely! But if you played a barb in the last playtest with advantage on every TWF attack while raging, it was also a bit ridiculous. You just stayed quiet about it because OMG THE DMG!

 

[LabyrinthLord718]

Good points, all. I will have to see it in action, of course. I will be running 5e in September with my group. It will be very experimental; I may run a combat where the PCs all have advantage and then all have disadvantage in the next. I'm very curious to see when you explode this dynamic out, does it just snowball in one direction or the other, have a bell curve, or negate itself. Also depends on how hot the dice are in that person's hands, too.

 

[Dragonsbane]

My group and I played a one-shot today as someone from our regular PF group was not able to attend. It was pretty fun, although the basic rules are really lacking in detail IMHO.

I must agree with the above poster in regards to the fact that adv/disadv seems to really remove the need for any sort of score, pumping up with adv and making things with disadv too hard.

As a DM, before 5th edition I had a player in a 3e game with this power, two die rolls take the best. It was quickly disallowed for being so powerful. With everything in the game giving or taking the bonus, it won't be long till entire guides on how to gain adv are out there and min/maxers simply try to gain it no matter what they do above all else.

Also, strange thing, I think I read that adv and disadv cancel each other out, even if one side has advantage from many things and just one disadvantage modifier. Strange.

Makes the whole game seem a bit too random, although I really like most of 5e so far.

 

[transtemporal]

it won't be long till entire guides on how to gain adv are out there and min/maxers simply try to gain it no matter what they do above all else.

Faerie Fire. Done. Group attack roll advantage. The AoE is smaller than the playtest and it now requires concentration up to a minute, but still amazingly powerful.

I noticed they removed Cause Fear for basic, which is probably just as well. Faerie Fire and Cause Fear spells were devastating in combo.

 

[77IM]

Check out the fantastic analysis here: http://www.enworld.org/forum/showth...in-5e-combet&p=6335154&viewfull=1#post6335154
TL;DR you can spend an action to grant advantage or disadvantage; you can spend an action plus make a check to grant both advantage and disadvantage or multiple of either.


In addition, I'd allow advantage/disadvantage for:
- Significant encounter features; "high ground" is not enough, but attacking someone on unstable ground might be.
- Really super clever tactics. I have a hard time thinking of an example that doesn't already fit into the "spend and action" or "encounter feature" guideline. I guess if you're facing a soaking-wet troll, maybe he gets disadvantage on his save against lightning bolt but advantage against fireball, encouraging players to pick the right one.

 

[Juriel]

Check out the fantastic analysis here: http://www.enworld.org/forum/showth...in-5e-combet&p=6335154&viewfull=1#post6335154
TL;DR you can spend an action to grant advantage or disadvantage; you can spend an action plus make a check to grant both advantage and disadvantage or multiple of either.

In addition, I'd allow advantage/disadvantage for:
- Significant encounter features; "high ground" is not enough, but attacking someone on unstable ground might be.
- Really super clever tactics. I have a hard time thinking of an example that doesn't already fit into the "spend and action" or "encounter feature" guideline. I guess if you're facing a soaking-wet troll, maybe he gets disadvantage on his save against lightning bolt but advantage against fireball, encouraging players to pick the right one.

This is exactly how I'd use it.