Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DND_Reborn" data-source="post: 8509131" data-attributes="member: 6987520">I was wondering what your thoughts are on the mechanics of:1. Advantage (and Disadvantage)2. Critical Hits (and possibly ability checks and saves?)3. Fumbles (also possibly on ability checks and saves?)I would appreciate any discussion on the topics you wish to have, and I'll state my own thoughts; whether you share them, disagree, or have something else to share.Also, to be clear, I am not asking for solutions on how to achieve some of the changes I am suggesting--I can do that easily enough--I am just opening up the points to discussion. However, if you want to share a solution, please do so.1. ADVANTAGE (and DISADVANTAGE)1A. I like the concept for its simplicity, but sometimes feel it is too simple to adequately represent all the different positive aspects it does represent.1B. I think advantage is too common and easy to get, while imposing disadvantage rarely happens IME short of exhaustion.1C. Because it is so common, I feel the impact is too low.1D. I would like to see advantage harder to achieve, but have more impact when you get it.1E. The idea of a +5 bonus (e.g. passive perception with advantage) is not equivalent to advantage in rolling.1F. I would replace current advantage sources with minor +1 or +2 bonuses. I don't think this would be enough to break bounded accuracy at all.EDIT: 1G. Advantage and Disadvantage can cancel, but your net Advantage/Disadvantage should apply. (I do this, but forgot about it and added it after [USER=29398]@Lanefan[/USER]'s post).2. CRITICAL HITS (and Ability Checks/ Saves)2A. On a linear d20, if you need a 20 to hit a creature, it should NOT also be a critical hit; it should be a normal hit.2B. I find even the 1 in 20 chance on the d20 to be a bit too commonplace for myself to consider it "special".2C. I think the easier it is for you to hit a target, the greater your chance to score a critical should be.2D. I liked the older idea of Critical Threats and Confirmed Critical Hits, but rolling the extra die did slow things down a bit. Of course, you could roll both dice at once, but for some reason as a DM that just has never sat well with me.2E. I like the idea of a critical success on an ability check or save, and making it a natural 20 always succeeds. I critical success on an ability check might change it from an action to a bonus action, and a critically successful save might deal minimum damage or none.2F. I wonder at times if criticals are even really necessary for the game, since older editions didn't have them.2G. I think something other than double dice damage would make criticals more interesting, but complex tables, etc. aren't the way to go IMO.3. FUMBLES (and Ability Checks/ Saves)3A. The libra in me likes balance and feels if you can crit, you should be able to fumble.3B. I don't like just fumbling on a 1 in 20, it is too common and the more actions you have the more likely you are to fumble.3C. Like crits, fumbles should be more common for harder to hit creatures and harder to succeed tasks/saves.3D. Confirming fumbles is a good idea, but you run into the same issue of extra dice rolling, which IME slows things down too much.3E. Despite point 3A, I am not sold on fumbles being necessary really.3F. I am not a big fan of just including them for comic relief.I think that's it for now. If anyone has any thoughts to add or share, I eagerly await your posts!</blockquote>

Verification