log in or register to remove this ad

 

Level Up (A5E) Changes to Advantage

ThatGuySteve

Explorer
You are acting like they would not just update the how to dice reference linked all over roll20. You can't argue that people use it for d220k1/2d20d1 or whatever it is but couldn' t use it for the new thing too. Either the current advantage is subject to the same hassle you are thinking the new one would be or they are both exempt from it
I acknowledge that if the VTTs update to make it easy there will be no problem. I don't know how often they update for 3rd party products though so it isn't a given. It's a small consideration in the grand scheme of things and I don't want to derail the conversation further down this path, provably not worth bringing it up tbh.

I'd rather focus on the question of what to do with Advantage. My gut feel is that the 5/10 threshold feels less fun and is more fiddly than roll 2 keep highest.

On a radically different track, what if advantage was the only route to criticals? A nat 20 would no longer be a critical hit, but if you hit with both dice with Advantage it would be (a bit like the 3e roll to confirm). You would have more criticals and it would make applying Disadvantage on opposition more important to stop them getting the crits. Enemies with pack tactics would become terrifying.
 
Last edited:

log in or register to remove this ad

tetrasodium

Hero
Supporter
In other words you acknowledge that your only argument against it was nonsense but invoke the almighty no true scottsman "fiddly" of 5e to declare it bad and move on to suggesting advantage be changed to only affect it in small fraction of cases since you can't crit with skills from expertise while making disadvantage practically meaningless the vast majority of the time.
 
Last edited:

ThatGuySteve

Explorer
In other words you acknowledge that your only argument against it was nonsense but invoke the almighty no true scottsman "fiddly" of 5e to declare it bad and move on to suggesting advantage be changed to only affect it in small fraction of cases since you can't crit with skills from expertise while making disadvantage practically meaningless the vast majority of the time.
As I've said, I acknowledge the VTT issue is minor. I'm not going to be drawn on this further. If you feel you need to "win" harder on this topic you'll get no response from me.

I think Advantage is an elegant mechanic that could be expanded on. I think more rolls in the game are made in combat than anywhere else, particularly attack rolls, so I disagree with you saying it is only a small fraction of cases.

You can't crit with skills in 5E. Maybe you can in A5E? That is something that could be explored instead of trying to shut down a suggestion.

It would become a harder choice for barbarians as to whether they attack recklessly, if the chance of getting a crit is so much higher. In play, I've never seen a barbarian not use reckless attack. Tripping with your first attack, to get advantage on the 2nd, might be more appealing if more crits are on offer. I think my suggestion would change the tactics of combat, but it is very much off the top of my head.

Disadvantage would have the same effect as it always had, sorry, not really sure what you're last point was? If anything, being able to apply Disadvantage would be more useful to cancel out the risk of enemies attacking with Advantage.
 

Phoebasss

Explorer
If I'm remembering correctly, advantage comes out to ~+5 on average. So to borrow a subsystem from Shadow of the Demon Lord, what do people think of this as a potential change?
First advantage: add a d8 to your roll (avg 4.5) so only a little worse than current advantange.
Second advantage: roll 2d8 and add the highest d8 to your roll.
Third advantage and on: same as above but 3d8.

Then the usual disadvantage cancels and so on. So there's some benefit to having multiple advantages. Of course we can always keep the current system but just roll 2, 3, 4, 5 d20s and so on.

A bonus is in some ways better than advantage. With advantage you can’t roll higher than your normally would. With a bonus you can.
I don't think this is true in practice. In most situations in 5e, and I'm open to this changing in A5e, rolling well over a DC or the AC of the monster is meaningless. Once you meet AC or DC, there's nothing more you can do outside of a crit. So while the bonus lets you roll higher than normal, I'm not sure that matters very often. Usually you're looking for like a 10+ or 12+ on die if you're proficient.
 

Instead of changing the mechanic, I’d like to see character abilities where you can choose to roll with disadvantage, and get a benefit if you succeed anyway. It’s a way of having a more interesting risk:reward option.
 

tetrasodium

Hero
Supporter
Instead of changing the mechanic, I’d like to see character abilities where you can choose to roll with disadvantage, and get a benefit if you succeed anyway. It’s a way of having a more interesting risk:reward option.
The problem with so many of the suggestions since @Morrus's beyond the balance issues is that they removethe ability for a GM & players to use it to guide/encourage on the fly logical planning & roleplay decisions on a mechanical level like his & the old staking circcumstance bonuses/penalties allowed.


It sounds like you are suggesting drawing on fate style compels giving fate points/chips but without the massive structural differences that alow it to be a balanced cornerstone of that stystem
 

I acknowledge that if the VTTs update to make it easy there will be no problem. I don't know how often they update for 3rd party products though so it isn't a given. It's a small consideration in the grand scheme of things and I don't want to derail the conversation further down this path, provably not worth bringing it up tbh.

I'd rather focus on the question of what to do with Advantage. My gut feel is that the 5/10 threshold feels less fun and is more fiddly than roll 2 keep highest.

On a radically different track, what if advantage was the only route to criticals? A nat 20 would no longer be a critical hit, but if you hit with both five with Advantage it would be (a bit like the 3e roll to confirm). You would have more criticals and it would make applying Disadvantage on opposition more important to stop them getting the crits. Enemies with pack tactics would become terrifying.
I like it. I feel the fiddliness is worth the nuance. Now if we could just find a way to implement success with a cost...
 

ThatGuySteve

Explorer
Advantage should let you do something different, not just the same but with a higher chance of success.

Triggering special abilities or criticals to Advantage makes it more interesting and nuanced than just shuffling around the numbers for your roll to hit.

When you're enemy trips and hits the deck, that's when you strike the finishing blow. When you trip, you throw sand in your attackers eyes so they can't finish you.
 

aco175

Legend
I'm not sold on something that involves more dice rolling to confirm like a crit or something like advantage/disadvantage. I mostly like the idea of half advantage and full advantage but think we need to look at the classes that rely on this and if it is worth it.

I mostly like the simplicity of the mechanic in play. To fiddle with it without making is fast and clean needs to be thought about first.
 

The problem with so many of the suggestions since @Morrus's beyond the balance issues is that they removethe ability for a GM & players to use it to guide/encourage on the fly logical planning & roleplay decisions on a mechanical level like his & the old staking circcumstance bonuses/penalties allowed.


It sounds like you are suggesting drawing on fate style compels giving fate points/chips but without the massive structural differences that alow it to be a balanced cornerstone of that stystem

I don't play Fate so I don't actually know what that reference is.

I'm thinking of something pretty straightforward: for whatever reason, you know that you are probably going to succeed at something, given the DC and your bonus. So you go for a little more, get a little more ambitious. Because you're trying something harder, you roll with disadvantage. If you still succeed, the results are all that much more impressive.

I mean, really, it's quite similar to the -5/+10 of GWM and Sharpshooter, but using disadvantage.
 

tetrasodium

Hero
Supporter
I don't play Fate so I don't actually know what that reference is.

I'm thinking of something pretty straightforward: for whatever reason, you know that you are probably going to succeed at something, given the DC and your bonus. So you go for a little more, get a little more ambitious. Because you're trying something harder, you roll with disadvantage. If you still succeed, the results are all that much more impressive.

I mean, really, it's quite similar to the -5/+10 of GWM and Sharpshooter, but using disadvantage.
There's a page on invoking aspects & compels in fate here. Without knowing what kind of "benefit" your suggesting I can really only say that it has the potential to be super abusable since you could just try again or let someone else do it.
 

jmucchiello

Adventurer
Instead of changing the mechanic, I’d like to see character abilities where you can choose to roll with disadvantage, and get a benefit if you succeed anyway. It’s a way of having a more interesting risk:reward option.
This sort of already exists in very limited form. A barbarian can make a wreckless attack gaining advantage and giving disadvantage to himself on defense.

Trip: If you do not already have disadvantage on your melee attack, you can impose disadvantage on yourself. If the attack succeeds, apply damage normally and your opponent is knocked prone.
All the old maneuvers could be similar: disarm, sunder, overrun, bull rush. Even charge could work like that.

Alternatively: If you have advantage on your next melee attack, you can forgo advantage....
 



Phoebasss

Explorer
Massively different distribution (and slightly different range).
Also of note, I think 2d8 might actually be better than 1d20 at hitting the usual thresholds to score a hit on average.
EDIT: did the math. It is marginally worse, unless your goal number is 8+ on die. So against low AC enemies disadvantage becomes an... advantage.
And by low AC, I mean AC 13- at level one. 15- if you have archery.
 

Giauz

Explorer
Massively different distribution (and slightly different range).

_
glass.
What if for a d24, you rolled a d20 and d4. Keep the d20 result and only re-roll the d4 for a result to add to that if it is even. Do something similar with the 2d8's.
 

Phoebasss

Explorer
What if for a d24, you rolled a d20 and d4. Keep the d20 result and only re-roll the d4 for a result to add to that if it is even. Do something similar with the 2d8's.
This seems like a lot of work for what amounts to making a simple system complex in a way that doesn't give additional options. It also doesn't solve the problem of stacking advantage and disadvantage.
 

6ENow!

The Smurfiest Wizard Ever!
It also doesn't solve the problem of stacking advantage and disadvantage.
Sorry, I haven't had time to read through the whole thread again, but when was there a problem with stacking advantage and/or disadvantage? We've been doing since the beginning of playing 5E and no issues yet. shrug
 

Phoebasss

Explorer
Sorry, I haven't had time to read through the whole thread again, but when was there a problem with stacking advantage and/or disadvantage? We've been doing since the beginning of playing 5E and no issues yet. shrug
Oh I just mean that by native 5e it doesn't stack and I think it should, and the 2d8 2d12 system makes stacking even more weird to figure out because I don't have d14s.
 

tetrasodium

Hero
Supporter
Sorry, I haven't had time to read through the whole thread again, but when was there a problem with stacking advantage and/or disadvantage? We've been doing since the beginning of playing 5E and no issues yet. shrug

stock 5e advantage doesn't handle multiple advantage/disadvantage sources like you could with circumstance bonuses/penalties that leads to some absurd "nah lets do it the $ReallyReallyStupid way, we already have (dis)advantage because of $reasons, lets tell the smuggler we aren't interested in his stolen uniforms that would give us/cancel another (dis)advantage cause you can only have it once " or situations where something tiny cancels out a massive (dis)advantage that makes no sense. Morrus suggested an interesting method here that gives a nice middle ground between what was lost & what advantage does. In that example you have something like (dis)advantage 2/5/10/whatever & reroll the d20 if you get above/below that value but just add/subtract all the different sources to get the final above/below value. A lot of the suggestions since then are just different from 5e's advantage for the sake of being different & don't seem to actually bring anything new to the table beyond simply being different from 2d20[k/d]1
 

Advertisement2

Advertisement4

Top