D&D 5E (2014) Reflecting on advantage and disadvantage.

[seebs]

The binary (either you have it or you don't) thing also makes spells like Foresight much better than they would be if you were counting.

 

[redrick]

recently my character got hit by a poison gas. The disadvantage was applied to all my attack rolls in the encounter. The encounter was AC 8. I had a +7 to hit. So when i rolled to attack, I had to either roll a 2 or better in one die roll, or roll a 2 or better in two die rolls. If I had been a halfling, I would get to reroll the possibility of a 1.

While statistically, i could have rolled a 1 on my disadvantage, I didn't. Therefore, the disadvantage had absolutely no impact on my attacks. Meanwhile, if i had a -2 penalty, or a -4 penalty, for instance, my probability to miss would have tripled or worse.

AC 8 is super low. It's meant to be almost auto-hit. Were you fighting zombies? If so, where a critical hit is necessary to avoid the I-don't-die Con save, disadvantage significantly reduces the odds of rolling a natural 20.

It's a different outcome than a numerical penalty, but I disagree that it's a bad outcome. Monsters with AC 8 are corner cases.

As for firing a bow in a hurricane with a blindfold and itching powder — nothing stops your DM from taking stock of the extenuating circumstances and upping the ante on you. As a DM, you aren't obligated to the Adv/Disadv mechanic and nothing else. The point is to make for faster, simpler rulings, instead of having to constantly weigh the exact bonus or penalty for any given situational modifier. If a situation obviously trumps the default mechanic, overrule it in that situation.

For instance, in your hurricane example, I'd ignore the target AC (seeing as AC is not the limiting factor when archering in a hurricane), and just use a DC. What you've described sounds nearly impossible, so DC 30. A high level archery focused character can hit that on a lucky roll.

I guess I'd probably impose disadvantage for the itching powder.

 

[Staccat0]

No one is really describing an actual issue here, just framing a preference as one. They're essentially just saying they like doing math. Which is fine, but not an inherent positive for the average gamer.

Like, the idea that giving someone a +2 or a +3 is more "accurate" than advantage feels like a fallacy to me. They are both really silly and broad absctractions any way you wanna cut it. Neither one has anything to do with simulating a real fight.

I've seen modifiers bog down new players. I've never seen a player complain about the advantage system. It's all anecdotal, but before you throw it under the bus you might consider -- is it more FUN to stack modifiers, and if so why?

Because if the answer is "accuracy" or some percieved realism, I can show you systems you'll like more than D&D.

PS Remember sometimes players don't need to roll. When I am looking at 3 or 4 factors that might give a PC advantage I can just... let them do it, because rolling doesn't autimatically make the story more interesting or the gae more fun.

 

[Imaculata]

I still play Pathfinder and it can get crazy with bonuses. Flanking, bless, prone enemy, higher ground, cover, aid, dazzled, etc. I was forever asking people if they remembered bard song and buff table tents were common. Paizo even sells a deck of Buff cards.

I agree, it was messy and confusing.... and yet....

...I really do like the idea that I get a bonus for taking the effort to seek higher ground. But if I'm already blessed, and I get only one advantage, then why bother to also seek higher ground? I did like how everything mattered. It made you think more about strategy, and it's what makes me bring out the miniatures and dungeon tiles.

So I'm on the fence. I appreciate how 5th edition tries to solve this problem. And yet I regret that all that strategy is now basically watered down to just a single bonus for everything.

 

[redrick]

I agree, it was messy and confusing.... and yet....

...I really do like the idea that I get a bonus for taking the effort to seek higher ground. But if I'm already blessed, and I get only one advantage, then why bother to also seek higher ground? I did like how everything mattered. It made you think more about strategy, and it's what makes me bring out the miniatures and dungeon tiles.

So I'm on the fence. I appreciate how 5th edition tries to solve this problem. And yet I regret that all that strategy is now basically watered down to just a single bonus for everything.

Bless (and bardic inspiration) are both numerical bonuses in 5e, not advantage. A number of spells grant static bonuses, which can be stacked with advantage cleanly. (Haste also comes to mind.) Advantage/Disadvantage are not the only spices on the spice rack. They are just the default bonuses, particularly with regards to situational modifiers.

There is still benefit to seeking superior tactical advantages. You might have advantage on your next attack, but getting higher ground might impose disadvantage on attacks against you. There's always cover, which is separate from advantage. Controlling choke points or exploiting range and reach are all tactical options that work regardless of advantage and disadvantage.

 

[Mistwell]

On the poll of "what three things do you like the most about 5e", the "Advantage/Disadvantage mechanic" scored the highest number of likes, at 96.5%. Kinda hard to get any better than that on the Internet.

 

[strider13x]

Been playing regularly since the beginning of the playtest. Haven't had Adv or Disad stack but maybe twice. Maybe.

 

[pming]

Hiya!

Since when was "+2 or Advantage" a thing? I never read it that way. I always read it as "when there's a lot of little good or bad things and you don't want to keep counting, just stop and say Advantage or Disadvantage". I also read it as "when there's one or two little good or bad things, just apply that bonus/penalty". I also, also, read it as "when all of the above applies, use a both".

The key thing I "read" into that rule is this: "Here's a mechanic to make your game run faster".

If you get to a point where trying to total up numbers is slowing things down...drop it and use the Adv/Dis mechanic. I never saw that as being mutually exclusive to any other bonuses. I use both, but cap at +/-5. Once I get either above or below 5 for adjustments, I usually just jump to the Adv/Dis mechanic.

I also tend to apply my 'numbers' to AC or DC...not to "rolls".

For example: An archer standing in tall vegetation (at about eye-level) shooting at a well-hidden tasloi up in a tree with the sun behind it. I look at the tasloi's AC, say, 14. Then I look the factors; I'd give +2 for cover, +1 for archer being in tall vegetation, another +2 for the sun being behind the tasloi through the trees. That's +5 to the tasloi's AC...so it's AC 19. Does the archer have anything giving him Adv/Dis? No? Then just roll. Or, yes he does? Maybe he is Exhausted? Ok, roll at Disadvantage. The tasloi's AC is still 19. I didn't just leave it at 14, then start applying 'negative modifiers' to the archer, eventually ending in..."Oh, er, well you're already Exhausted, and you can't stack/add Disadvantages, so roll at Disadvantage against AC14".

I guess what I'm saying is... either I'm doing it wrong (which is fine; I'll keep doing it wrong because it works for me), or all of you are (which is also fine).

^_^

Paul L. Ming

 

[Psikerlord#]

recently my character got hit by a poison gas. The disadvantage was applied to all my attack rolls in the encounter. The encounter was AC 8. I had a +7 to hit. So when i rolled to attack, I had to either roll a 2 or better in one die roll, or roll a 2 or better in two die rolls. If I had been a halfling, I would get to reroll the possibility of a 1.

While statistically, i could have rolled a 1 on my disadvantage, I didn't. Therefore, the disadvantage had absolutely no impact on my attacks. Meanwhile, if i had a -2 penalty, or a -4 penalty, for instance, my probability to miss would have tripled or worse.

Yeah there is definitely a place for smaller 1-2 point modifiers in 5e along with adv/disad. In fact it is already there in half cover, the bless spell and magic weapons. Only using adv/disad as you modifiers is oversimplified for me. The devs went too far removing (practically) all other modifiers to keep the game as newb friendly as possible (along with easy healing/full reset).

I understand the basic game rules being basic. Make the barriers of entry as low as possible! But they should have - at the very least - included examples of lesser modifiers in the DMG under DM options (with slow healing, injuries, etc)

Eg: +1 or +2 for flanking. The adv on flanking rule in DMG is straight up broken in practice.

 

[psychophipps]

So the DMG has an optional rule that basically gives everyone Pack Tactics?