Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="slobster" data-source="post: 5921508" data-attributes="member: 6693711">Stacking advantage works pretty well, giving you a pretty aggressive case of nonetheless diminishing returns. Others have run the numbers pretty well.What about stacking disadvantage? To use the baseline success rate of 60%, disadvantage (singular) already reduces your chance to succeed to 36%, since you have to succeed on both rolls! That's essentially a -5 penalty, though it also doubles (basically) your chances of an auto-failure and makes a crit exceedingly unlikely.Double disadvantage takes your success rate down to 21.6%, an effective -3 penalty. Triple disadvantage takes it down to 13%.The following table lists the effects of stacking advantage and disadvantage at 4 representative points. These points are given assuming a normal roll; so data here represents the effects of stacking disadvantage on a roll that would normally succeed 10% of the time, 30%, 60%, and 80%. The numbers in parenthesis are the effective flat numerical bonus given by stacking the advantage or disadvantage.<img src="http://s14.postimage.org/7rm6rxf5b/advantage_table.jpg" alt="" class="fr-fic fr-dii fr-draggable " data-size="" style="" />[EDIT] I apologize for the lazy image formatting, I don't know how to add tables in these comment windows. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f61b.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":P" title="Stick out tongue    :P"  data-smilie="7"data-shortname=":P" /> [/EDIT]One thing to notice here is that advantage is more effective at improving rolls in a sweet spot towards the middle, and is better at improving low rolls than improving good rolls (diminishing returns). The corollary is that disadvantage works the inverse way, and is better at wrecking what should be a good roll than it is at exacerbating an already bad roll.Food for thought.</blockquote>

Verification