Under what conditions would you give advantage/disadvantage?

[IronWolf]

I'd see if anything was left after the cancellations were handled, and go with that. So, 4 Advantages and 6 Disadvantages would still result in a net 2 Disadvantages and the Disadvantage die would be in play.

That's just my gut reaction, though. I haven't seen anything official.

Yep - that would be my ruling as well.

I'm kind of hoping they don't have a list... I like the idea of it being fully open ended.

Agreed. Openness can be a good thing.

 

[Kzach]

Weigh over 400 lbs(hey no fat boy comments please) my 80lbs nephew will never beat me wrestling... But Linda who is well under 200lbs could probly win as often as loose.

No offense, but as a big-time fan of MMA and long-ago practitioner, I can tell you right now that weight and size makes a BIG difference. A competition between two equally skilled competitors of different weight will almost always favour the heavier fighter. The amount of skill required to offset a weight/size disparity is much larger than Hollywood would make one believe. 90lb femme fatales beating up 200lb mercs simply isn't realistic. Short of kicking the guy in the nuts, the girl is screwed.

Unless she's Ronda Rousey. In that case, you're losing an arm

 

[Redbadge]

Right. But we also know that if I get Adv from a source and then I get Disadv from a different source, they cancel. So my question is, "What if I get Adv from a source, then Disadv from a source, and then Adv from a different source?" I get that you can never get multiple dice, but this is a different question.

From the way I read it, advantage and disadvantage were kind of conditions that were either on, or they were off.

In other words, your rogue is hidden, is attacking a blind goblin that is also paralyzed? Congratulations, you have advantage for your ranged sling attack.

Is this goblin also prone? Unfortunately you also have disadvantage on the attack.

Since you currently have both advantage and disadvantage, they cancel out.

 

[GMforPowergamers]

No offense, but as a big-time fan of MMA and long-ago practitioner, I can tell you right now that weight and size makes a BIG difference. A competition between two equally skilled competitors of different weight will almost always favour the heavier fighter. The amount of skill required to offset a weight/size disparity is much larger than Hollywood would make one believe. 90lb femme fatales beating up 200lb mercs simply isn't realistic. Short of kicking the guy in the nuts, the girl is screwed.

Unless she's Ronda Rousey. In that case, you're losing an arm

I agree, when all else is equal bet on the big guy. In the case of menand linda, i have very little training in unarmed, and dislike fighting (I'm a lover not a fighter) she on the other end is a tom boy who grew up fighting, and in the last ten years of adult life picked up kick boxing and krav maga...

Race/size does matter, but training and talent matter more. A hafling monk or fighter with 16 dexnand 16 str should not have disadvantage on a golaith wizard with a 12 str and 8 dex



On the other hand I would be fine with a dm ruleing that when a hafling rogue with a 12 str and 16 dex went against a golaith fighter with a 16 str and 12 dex

 

[AeroDm]

From the way I read it, advantage and disadvantage were kind of conditions that were either on, or they were off.

In other words, your rogue is hidden, is attacking a blind goblin that is also paralyzed? Congratulations, you have advantage for your ranged sling attack.

Is this goblin also prone? Unfortunately you also have disadvantage on the attack.

Since you currently have both advantage and disadvantage, they cancel out.

Your approach is pretty neat and clean. I sort of hope they go with the other way because then it still incentivizes incremental improvement. If the goblin being prone grants disadvantage on ranged attacks, then you only have incentive to get advantage to even out. Any other improvements (class powers, spells, maneuvers, etc) are now pointless.

 

[Blackwarder]

Taking iron the other side of the scale, I handed out disadvantage for trying to do stuff that shouldn't be possible, for example trying to hit two creatures in one attack (in this case sleeping rats) or trying to hit two kobolds who stand extremely close to each other.

Warder

 

[Keldryn]

As much as I'd like to see this in use and agree with its use, it would never be widely accepted for fear of sexism. After all, if size and mass matter, then women will never be 'as strong' as men, and that road leads to madness

Well, my example with the halfling and the human was meant to be an example of a Small creature trying to grapple a Medium creature. I probably wouldn't get into applying an advantage or disadvantage within the same size category unless there was a situation advantage.

This could also be "doubled up" by applying disadvantage to the smaller creature and an advantage to the larger creature if there is a difference of two size categories.

 

[eryndel]

From the way I read it, advantage and disadvantage were kind of conditions that were either on, or they were off.

In other words, your rogue is hidden, is attacking a blind goblin that is also paralyzed? Congratulations, you have advantage for your ranged sling attack.

Is this goblin also prone? Unfortunately you also have disadvantage on the attack.

Since you currently have both advantage and disadvantage, they cancel out.

This is the way I'd go as well. My concern would be that we'd get a variation of the "+1 shuffle" if players were being so strongly rewarded to try and find just one more factor that will put them over the top.

I'll have to try both ways to be sure, but my gut feel would be to have only one level of advantage and disadvantage, and if you have both, they cancel.

Sent from my ADR6300 using Tapatalk 2