Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Imaculata" data-source="post: 8063819" data-attributes="member: 6801286">One of the things I dislike about the advantage system, is that the effects don't stack. If I give a party member advantage, and he already has it, it is wasted. But then again, I'm a fan of 3e. I like stacking bonusses.Stacking bonuses is exactly one of the things that 5e intended to get away from. No more +2 and by +3, like in 3e. So if your idea is to stack advantage, I can't help but feel you are going against what the system was intended to solve in the first place; we don't want to be doing the math of counting bonuses and penalties in 5e. I think the original design philosophy should be respected and continued.Perhaps there are other ways to make advantage more interesting, without making it stack. I like the idea of giving the player options on how to use advantage.&nbsp; I also like the idea of more strategic combat, and wider uses for various weapons (although beware of min maxing).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Imaculata, post: 8063819, member: 6801286"] One of the things I dislike about the advantage system, is that the effects don't stack. If I give a party member advantage, and he already has it, it is wasted. But then again, I'm a fan of 3e. I like stacking bonusses. Stacking bonuses is exactly one of the things that 5e intended to get away from. No more +2 and by +3, like in 3e. So if your idea is to stack advantage, I can't help but feel you are going against what the system was intended to solve in the first place; we don't want to be doing the math of counting bonuses and penalties in 5e. I think the original design philosophy should be respected and continued. Perhaps there are other ways to make advantage more interesting, without making it stack. I like the idea of giving the player options on how to use advantage. I also like the idea of more strategic combat, and wider uses for various weapons (although beware of min maxing). [/QUOTE]

Verification