In a recent Rule of Three it was stated that advantage and disadvantage would be binary; you're either at an advantage/disadvantage or you're not. It doesn't matter how many sources of advantage you have, it's always the same bonus. Likewise, it doesn't matter how many sources of advantage you have, one source of disadvantage will cancel them all out.
Is this for the best? I understand that it makes things very simple, but I like the idea of varying degrees of advantage/disadvantage. Sometimes you're just in a situation that's so overwhelmingly in your favor or so incredibly unlikely that you'll succeed that the odds should reflect that. It wouldn't even have to be complicated. The number of sources of advantage/disadvantage = the number of extra dice you roll, and they'd cancel each other out. If you have several sources of advantage, a single source of disadvantage would reduce the number of advantage d20s by one instead of removing them altogether.
In short: Would you like multiple sources of advantage and disadvantage stacking up, creating major advantages and disadvantages?
I for one, would.
Is this for the best? I understand that it makes things very simple, but I like the idea of varying degrees of advantage/disadvantage. Sometimes you're just in a situation that's so overwhelmingly in your favor or so incredibly unlikely that you'll succeed that the odds should reflect that. It wouldn't even have to be complicated. The number of sources of advantage/disadvantage = the number of extra dice you roll, and they'd cancel each other out. If you have several sources of advantage, a single source of disadvantage would reduce the number of advantage d20s by one instead of removing them altogether.
In short: Would you like multiple sources of advantage and disadvantage stacking up, creating major advantages and disadvantages?
I for one, would.