|
10 months ago ::
Sep 13, 2012 - 9:49AM
#1
|
Date Joined:
Dec 11, 2006
|
I am aware some like, some hate. I'm more interested in when to use it.
For example, Goblins in bright light are at a disadvantage. Make sense, easy to do.
When I am behind a fallen tree I get partial cover. Why instead do my enemies get -2 to hit me, instead of disadvantage? What makes this a -2 situation and not a disadvantage?
I am attacked by skeletons and I consecrate the ground, then I duck behind a low alter, providing me partial cover. Consecrate normally provides -1 to hit, save, damage, cover provides a -2 to hit. Is -3 better than 2d20 take lower? Could this not be converted into, both provide the skeletons disadvantage, general no stack rule applies?
Again, I like the mechanic, but it seems to me that you have two different rules.
Using my skeleton situation, I'd simply say consecration and cover provides disadvantage. They don't stack, done.
Using my skeleton situation, consecration -1 and cover -2 for a total of -3.
Which system do you want to use, basic or "dare I say" advanced?
Browncoats Unite...
|
|
|
|
10 months ago ::
Sep 13, 2012 - 10:28AM
#2
|
Date Joined:
Jan 20, 2005
|
I have thought about this, and I find multiple bonuses and malluses cumbersome in the system of (dis)advantage that is extremely streamlined.
Now that being said, I wondered about a system of stacking advantage that uses a d4 and increasing/decreasing the die size.
Goblin in bright light 1 disadvantage d20 - 1d4. If they are in bright light and behind cover (2 disadvantage) it's d20 - 1d6, and so on and so forth. It doesn't preclude failure, but does make it harder, or easier to do. It gives you the ease of just rolling 2 die, but gives you levels of it so that the more disadvantage you have, the much harder it is to do something. So instead of +2 here -2 there you just need to know how many stacks of advantage - disadvantages roll the appropriate dice and add or subtract as needed.
It's a thought, anyway.
|
|
|
|
10 months ago ::
Sep 13, 2012 - 10:45AM
#3
|
Date Joined:
Aug 28, 2005
|
A mix of the two would be preferable, specifically because the non-stacking but prevalent nature of advantage and advantage makes me worry that higher-level combat is going to boil down to everybody always having advantage and/or disadvantage all of the time. I may be overreacting, as I thought the same thing about 4E's Combat Advantage, but I'd still like to see little to no spells or other effects that directly grant advantage or impose disadvantage, leaving that to the result of conditions or other normal gameplay mechanics like flanking. I'd prefer that spells and effects just work on the normal system of granting bonuses and penalties except for maybe in some rare circumstances.
Why, yes, as a matter of fact I am the Unfailing Arbiter of All That Is Good Design (Even More So Than The Actual Developers) TMSpeaking of things that were badly designed, please check out this thread for my Minotaur fix. What have the critics said, you ask? "If any of my players ask to play a Minotaur, I'm definitely offering this as an alternative to the official version." - EmpactWB "If I ever feel like playing a Minotaur I'll know where to look!" - Undrave "WoTC if you are reading this - please take this guy's advice." - Ferol_Debtor_of_Torm "Really full of win. A minotaur that is actually attractive for more than just melee classes." - Cpt_Micha Also, check out my recent GENASI variant! If you've ever wished that your Fire Genasi could actually set stuff on fire, your Water Genasi could actually swim, or your Wind Genasi could at least glide, then look no further. Finally, check out my OPTIONS FOR EVERYONE article, an effort to give unique support to the races that WotC keeps forgetting about. Includes new racial feature options for the Changeling, Deva, Githzerai, Gnoll, Gnome, Goliath, Half-Orc, Kalashtar, Minotaur, Shadar-Kai, Thri-Kreen, Warforged and more!
|
|
|
|
10 months ago ::
Sep 13, 2012 - 10:48AM
#4
|
Date Joined:
May 30, 2010
|
My understanding is the follows.
You get a + or - to your attacks when your ability to aim or act is not impared or enhanced. Rather, there is something between you and your target which is preventing you for putting your full power into the attack.
That is, when a goblin is in the daylight it can't see as well. It's ability to act is hurt. When someone tries to hit the maximum distance their bow can fire, they just can't get the same speed and accuracy as you can when they are closer.
However, when the ground is concecrated, the skeleton can act just fine. However there is a spiritual power influecing the strenght of his attacks, making him in general weaker. But his ability to hit is not hindered.
When the thief is in hiding, his sense of security and lack of stress from the battle around him, gives him the ability to attack better, hence advantage. But because his target is behind a wall, where he can attack, and the options open to him are reduced, hence a -2.
|
|
|
|
10 months ago ::
Sep 13, 2012 - 10:55AM
#5
|
Date Joined:
May 27, 2012
|
It's a serious issue that needs to be addressed at some point. As of current, a kobold in sunlight who is also frightened, restrained, encumbered, intoxicated, and attacking an invisibile target is significantly better off than the kobold in sunlight whose foe is behind partial cover.
If you have your foe at your mercy and want to make sure it cannot overpower you and escape, then after you tie it up you would be better off putting up a small table to hide behind rather than demoralizing, intoxicating, blinding, or weighing down your enemy. It promotes system mastery (learning what stacks and what doesn't) rather than common sense.
The metagame is not the game.
|
|
|
|
10 months ago ::
Sep 13, 2012 - 11:24AM
#6
|
|
|
Daganev, that is the best explanation I have seen of the difference. However, there could still be so much debate over what 'hinders action' it will continue to cause problems. System Mastery is a big issue that needs to be avoided in this edition. In my games I have taken to stacking a +/-2 to creatures (monsters or PCs) who gain extra A/D, but that could easily get out of hand and dissolve the 'less headmath' idea that created the system.
|
|
|
|
10 months ago ::
Sep 13, 2012 - 11:50AM
#7
|
Date Joined:
May 30, 2010
|
Daganev, that is the best explanation I have seen of the difference. However, there could still be so much debate over what 'hinders action' it will continue to cause problems. System Mastery is a big issue that needs to be avoided in this edition. In my games I have taken to stacking a +/-2 to creatures (monsters or PCs) who gain extra A/D, but that could easily get out of hand and dissolve the 'less headmath' idea that created the system.
If what "hinders action" is still open to debate, then I just need to be a better linguist to describe it properly.
It's my understanding of the system based on the Q&A that talks about how and why A/D doesn't stack, and comparing the current application of it.
Perhaps someone can come up with a better way to word it so the distinction is more clear.
At the gaming table, it's been fairly obvious to me.
Perhaps it can be broken up into categories?
Grants Disadvantage:
Physiological changes to the negative
Limit of phyiscal capability
Extra ordinary stress
Grants Advantage:
Physiolgical changes to the possitive
Calm and Collected
Aided by another
Causes bonus or Mallus:
Physical obstructions
Spells
Terrain
Just an idea, the lists might be able to be expanded.
|
|
|
|
10 months ago ::
Sep 13, 2012 - 12:44PM
#8
|
- Forum Guide
- Hero Craftsman Gold Medalist
- Master Dungeon Master
Date Joined:
Jun 23, 2005
|
Advantage should be hard to get and disadvantage hard to give. My rule of thumb is that it should require an action or clever forethought to get. If you design an encounter area, you may want to make one area that gives advntage and one that gives disadvantage. But don't go overboard.
|
|
|
|
10 months ago ::
Sep 13, 2012 - 1:53PM
#9
|
Date Joined:
Apr 10, 2009
|
Advantage should be hard to get and disadvantage hard to give. My rule of thumb is that it should require an action or clever forethought to get. If you design an encounter area, you may want to make one area that gives advntage and one that gives disadvantage. But don't go overboard.
Functionally, this is the way I tend to look at it. Unfortunately, the Thug breaks this and thus is a problem unto itself. But that isn't the point of this thread....
But in practice, I go by how hard it was to get the 'advantage'' and how repeatable it is.
Carl
|
|
|
|
10 months ago ::
Sep 13, 2012 - 2:15PM
#10
|
Date Joined:
May 27, 2012
|
Thug gains a new way to deal Sneak Attack damage, when it doesn't have advantage. You still have to hit using your regular bonus, with just the one die (unless you have disadvantage, in which case you have to hit in spite of the other die).
The metagame is not the game.
|
|
|
