Why Jargon is Bad, and Some Modern Resources for RPG Theory

[Crimson Longinus]

Same. Like I said, I can see why they want to discourage hunting for every bonus imaginable, but there's better ways to do that.

Such as?

I didn’t like advantage/disadvantage when I first heard about it, but in practice it works really smoothly.

 

[Thomas Shey]

Such as?

I didn’t like advantage/disadvantage when I first heard about it, but in practice it works really smoothly.

There's two I've seen.

1. Just reduce the number of different types of bonuses. That way its still possible to hunt for a few, but it doesn't turn into the 3e stack-a-million-bonuses thing. This is the PF2e approach.

2. Diminishing returns. Shadow of the Demon Lord has what are called boons and banes. A boon adds +1D6 to the roll; a bane subtracts -1D6. You can have multiples of any of them but you only get the best. So if you've got three boons on your attack roll, you roll the D20, roll 3D6, and add the best of the D6 rolls to the value. It means its still somewhat useful hunting for multiples, but less and less so.

Edit: And to be clear, I don't really care how smoothly it works; it produces a result I don't like twice over; it makes only bothering with the first benefit what you do, and then it makes it matter too much.

 

[UngainlyTitan]

There's two I've seen.

1. Just reduce the number of different types of bonuses. That way its still possible to hunt for a few, but it doesn't turn into the 3e stack-a-million-bonuses thing. This is the PF2e approach.

2. Diminishing returns. Shadow of the Demon Lord has what are called boons and banes. A boon adds +1D6 to the roll; a bane subtracts -1D6. You can have multiples of any of them but you only get the best. So if you've got three boons on your attack roll, you roll the D20, roll 3D6, and add the best of the D6 rolls to the value. It means its still somewhat useful hunting for multiples, but less and less so.

Edit: And to be clear, I don't really care how smoothly it works; it produces a result I don't like twice over; it makes only bothering with the first benefit what you do, and then it makes it matter too much.

I really would not like the approach you are suggesting. The advantage/disadvantage has the merit of being a meaningful buff/debuff amid the swingyness of the D20. Most of the modifiers in the past were not that meaningful in the variance of the D20 unless you could stack them and the +-1d6 only approaches advantage/disadvantage at the upper limits. You are adding more moving parts with little or no gain.
YMMV

 

[Lanefan]

I really would not like the approach you are suggesting. The advantage/disadvantage has the merit of being a meaningful buff/debuff amid the swingyness of the D20.

I think the point is that not every buff/debuff has to be the same degree of "meaningful" in order to be relevant.

The other, perhaps bigger, thing with using straight +/- vs adv-disadv is that results can go outside the 1-20 range, which opens up a boatload more design space even if that range isn't expanded by very much (note that 3e D&D really overdid this!).

 

[Thomas Shey]

I really would not like the approach you are suggesting. The advantage/disadvantage has the merit of being a meaningful buff/debuff amid the swingyness of the D20. Most of the modifiers in the past were not that meaningful in the variance of the D20 unless you could stack them and the +-1d6 only approaches advantage/disadvantage at the upper limits. You are adding more moving parts with little or no gain.
YMMV

And does. I think the average of +5 that the 2D20 roll does is too much for one increment, and doesn't permit more in part specifically because its that strong. I know a lot of people like it; that's quite clear. I'm absolutely not one of them and consider it a fundamental design error.

 

[overgeeked]

I think the point is that not every buff/debuff has to be the same degree of "meaningful" in order to be relevant.

The other, perhaps bigger, thing with using straight +/- vs adv-disadv is that results can go outside the 1-20 range, which opens up a boatload more design space even if that range isn't expanded by very much (note that 3e D&D really overdid this!).

While I agree, I vastly prefer dis/advantage over mod hunting. There's almost nothing more tedious in a game than watching a player stop the game to hunt down and accumulate all those potential +1s. Just give them advantage. Done.

 

[Garthanos]

Same. Like I said, I can see why they want to discourage hunting for every bonus imaginable, but there's better ways to do that.

And does. I think the average of +5 that the 2D20 roll does is too much for one increment, and doesn't permit more in part specifically because its that strong. I know a lot of people like it; that's quite clear. I'm absolutely not one of them and consider it a fundamental design error.

Every edition of D&D prior to 5e has had more subtlety even if too many subtle benefits were stacked in some cases.

 

[Garthanos]

And does. I think the average of +5 that the 2D20 roll does is too much for one increment, and doesn't permit more in part specifically because its that strong. I know a lot of people like it; that's quite clear. I'm absolutely not one of them and consider it a fundamental design error.

even just having greater and lesser advantage....

 

[Lanefan]

While I agree, I vastly prefer dis/advantage over mod hunting. There's almost nothing more tedious in a game than watching a player stop the game to hunt down and accumulate all those potential +1s. Just give them advantage. Done.

Fine until the character would have a net +5 and -1 (i.e. say three advantages and one disadvantage) which in the advantage system cancels out to net-zero where it should be +4.

 

[overgeeked]

Fine until the character would have a net +5 and -1 (i.e. say three advantages and one disadvantage) which in the advantage system cancels out to net-zero where it should be +4.

Eh. I’m fine with the slight loss in resolution just to avoid the ever increasing stack of minutes wasted hunting down +1s. Plus or minus 5-10% isn’t worth bothering with.