Level Up (A5E) Changes to Advantage

[DND_Reborn]

Do you go so far as to roll double/triple advantage or does it all stack and cancel out but the max is still one advantage or disdvantage?

It never maxes out. The most we've had to date was 4d20s (original d20, plus two sources of advantages, and elven accuracy adding a 4th die).

Ex. if you have three sources of advantage (not easy to get, but possible) and one disadvantage, net is "+2", so you get both d20s for advantage still (total of 3d20).

We just think of them as +1/-1 for adv/dis and add it up.

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

You would need to choose this before you roll the first d20, otherwise you would know if you hit and not need to roll the 2nd unless you want to try for a crit. I would just go with another damage die for the weapon.

Yes indeed, the choice must be made before the attack.

 

[aco175]

I was thinking that the extra damage die is almost like a crit, so maybe a scale for this or additional choices for higher level where one more damage die is not the same as a crit.

 

[Guest 6801328]

I think advantage is fine as-is, and I hope Level Up doesn’t mess with it too much.

Agreed.

Inspiration, on the other hand, could use a tweak. One of the very few house rules I like is to let Inspiration be spent on a re-roll, rather than a roll with Advantage.

 

[DND_Reborn]

One of the very few house rules I like is to let Inspiration be spent on a re-roll, rather than a roll with Advantage

LOL that is the way we've always used it... I think our DM thought that was the rule when we were all learning the game, so we've never used it any other way.

 

[RangerWickett]

I've always been keen on the idea of weapons having different effects. It's a hell of design challenge though! Giving every weapon a reason to exist without making your game tedious.

Maybe we'd call them 'Expertise effects,' which would trigger if you had advantage and both attack rolls hit. Certain classes could get access at higher levels. But the problem is that 5e doesn't have many things you can do to your opponent other than damage that aren't, well, really strong.

In ZEITGEIST, we have shotguns do extra damage if you have advantage and both dice hit. Maybe picks could do the same in 5E.

But what else do you have? Moving (like if you slam them with a hammer) or tripping (like with a hooked polearm) isn't as meaningful as in 4e.

Grab someone with a whip?

Impose disadvantage on the enemy's next attack with your excellent swordplay? Blind them by slashing above their eye? Do you want to include the ability to actually wound, like gouge eyes, rip throats, and cripple limbs?

Maybe let you cleave into another enemy (with a greatsword or glaive)?

PF2 has some leeway because of the multiple action system. Normally attacks after the first get a -5 penalty, so you can differentiate a rapier - which if you stab the same guy multiple times you get only a -4 penalty - from a scimitar - which is better as slicing different guys.

Then again, maybe differentiation isn't that important. How often do PCs switch weapons even in the course of an adventure, let alone a fight? Where weapon differentiation would feel meaningful is if you had monsters be designed so you needed different weapons to handle them. AD&D had weapon-vs-armor-type tables, but that provided non-standardized numerical modifiers to AC, which were complicated and hard to remember. But 5E offers a way to make it simpler.

Sturdy Armor: This creature has resistance to weapon damage. When it is hit by a two-handed bludgeoning weapon, the armor cracks and it loses this ability.

Wary Shield: This creature has resistance to weapon damage, but after an attack hits it, this ability doesn't apply to other creatures that attack it before the end of its turn, because it can only guard against one.

Dancing Serpent Stance: This creature has resistance to weapon damage from attacks that aren't Dexterity-based. If it is grabbed or falls prone, it loses this resistance for a round.

Folded Crane Stance: This creature has resistance to damage from piercing weapons.

 

[Bacon Bits]

I had an idea to let the attacker choose whether they want to roll twice on the attack or roll twice on the damage (i.e., like Savage Attacker). I never have tested it, though. I suppose double advantage could allow both.

On disadvantage, though, I think the defender should pick attack vs damage.

Not sure what to do about checks, but multiadvantage feels hard to balance on non-combat checks.

 

[toucanbuzz]

I've always been keen on the idea of weapons having different effects. It's a hell of design challenge though! Giving every weapon a reason to exist without making your game tedious.

I bought Beyond Damage Dice off DMsGuild years ago on a sale but never ended up using it. The author, with design editing and publishing by veteran Wolfgang Baur, ambitiously tried to give each weapon 1-2 features above and beyond its damage. Not all made sense and many were overly complex, but I liked the idea of "advanced" combat, so long as the feature is simple in usage to avoid slowing the game down.

For example, historically medieval warriors almost always carried a dagger to finish their armored opponents once they'd beaten them down. It was a fantastic weapon once your foe was "grappled" but this gets lost in simplified combat. So, perhaps the dagger would inflict maximum damage dice (4) against a target you're grappling.

 

[RangerWickett]

For example, historically medieval warriors almost always carried a dagger to finish their armored opponents once they'd beaten them down. It was a fantastic weapon once your foe was "grappled" but this gets lost in simplified combat. So, perhaps the dagger would inflict maximum damage dice (4) against a target you're grappling.

The one game I felt handled this pretty well was Conan d20, way back in, I dunno, 2007 or something? Armor provided DR (as high as 10 with plate), but did not improve your AC (called Defense). Instead, your Defense was based on your skill at parrying or dodging, which improved by level.

With a finesse weapon if you rolled high enough you could ignore the DR. Most people in plate armor would also be wielding a shield, which they could parry with, but they can't do that if you grappled them. Also, in a grapple you can only use light weapons, so if you go up against a man in plate armor, it's probably impossible to bash through the armor, and really hard to hit at all if he keeps dodging, but if you can manage to grapple him, it gets a lot easier to shank him with a dagger.

 

[TheCosmicKid]

For example, historically medieval warriors almost always carried a dagger to finish their armored opponents once they'd beaten them down. It was a fantastic weapon once your foe was "grappled" but this gets lost in simplified combat. So, perhaps the dagger would inflict maximum damage dice (4) against a target you're grappling.

Yeah, 5E is very gun-shy about any sort of complexity in the grappling rules -- which is admittedly understandable. But it means you have to picture a 5E "grapple" more as "you are holding onto a loose bit of their clothing at arm's length" than anything like close-in combat. If I wanted to punch this up, I'd cheat: rather than inventing yet another dreaded grappling system, I'd create a concept of "range 0" for whenever creatures are fighting in the same five-foot space, put a few logical restrictions on actions you can take in that circumstance, and just say that one of the things you can do in a grapple is pull a creature into your space to invoke range 0.