Yeah....kinda agree.I'm not sure how I feel about them bringing back semi-regular negative modifiers to rolls after they constructed the entire advantage/disadvantage system to avoid that kind of fiddly (and easily forgotten) number crunching
Yeah....kinda agree.I'm not sure how I feel about them bringing back semi-regular negative modifiers to rolls after they constructed the entire advantage/disadvantage system to avoid that kind of fiddly (and easily forgotten) number crunching
Yeah, but the problem with advantage/disadvantage is that the more sources there are of them in play, the more likely it is that everything just gets cancelled down to straight rolls.This was always one of the big reasons for advantage/disadvantage, everyone can immediately see if you're applying it. It's true it lacks granularity, the question is if granularity is actually desirable for D&D.
That's one legitimate problem with the system. Perhaps it would be good to have something like Greater Advantage and Greater Disadvantage, which can't be cancelled (if you would have both, the one you received more recently applies).Yeah, but the problem with advantage/disadvantage is that the more sources there are of them in play, the more likely it is that everything just gets cancelled down to straight rolls.
Fog Cloud was always the most obvious example of this. Everyone gets advantage on attack rolls because their target can't see them, and also gets disadvantage on attack rolls because they can't see the target, so the fight just proceeds with nobody being able to get either advantage or disadvantage.
Fog Cloud was always the most obvious example of this. Everyone gets advantage on attack rolls because their target can't see them, and also gets disadvantage on attack rolls because they can't see the target, so the fight just proceeds with nobody being able to get either advantage or disadvantage.
Monsters that inflict exhaustion with their attacks, perhaps.What would push a character to the point where they would acquire 10 levels of exhaustion and then die?
Sure, and environmental effects and injuries (as an optional rule, likely).Monsters that inflict exhaustion with their attacks.
Yeah, but the problem with advantage/disadvantage is that the more sources there are of them in play, the more likely it is that everything just gets cancelled down to straight rolls.
Fog Cloud was always the most obvious example of this. Everyone gets advantage on attack rolls because their target can't see them, and also gets disadvantage on attack rolls because they can't see the target, so the fight just proceeds with nobody being able to get either advantage or disadvantage.
Yeah, but it's illustrative of the issue. Once you have at least one source of advantage and one source of disadvantage in play, adding more of either does nothing - so too much proliferation of sources of advantage and disadvantage makes the system break down.That’s a funky case that needs to be addressed. It should be “if you can see a target who can’t see you” not just “if the target can’t see you.”
In other words, that’s a problem with the specific rule (there may be others) not with the advantage/disadvantage system in general.
Nice find. I hadn't seen this.Exhaustion – 5th Edition SRD This link provides alternate rules for Exhaustion.
It's certainly possible. I like the alternate Exhaustion rules in 5eSRD because it actually shows you what each level of Exhaustion is going to do your character if they push themselves too far. Ditto for the Fatigue and Strife tables in A5e.Nice find. I hadn't seen this.
You can now see how the 1D&D rules may have evolved from these alternate rules.
Yeah, but it's illustrative of the issue. Once you have at least one source of advantage and one source of disadvantage in play, adding more of either does nothing - so too much proliferation of sources of advantage and disadvantage makes the system break down.