Would this house-rule that treats advantage as a +1 to the roll instead (and disadvantage as -1) and allows them to stack be balanced? The Next CEO of Stack OverflowHow does rolling two dice and taking the higher affect the average outcome?What are the implications of using AC rolls for defense?Is this house rule replacing encumbrance balanced?Is this proposed Spyglass house-rule balanced?How does the “Handling Mobs” rule work with Advantage & Disadvantage?Advantage on damage rolls - is it still balanced?How would changing critical hits like this affect my game?What are the balance effects of counting instances granting Advantage and Disadvantage to determine Advantage?Is this alternative initiative house-rule balanced?Will Open Legend’s “Every Roll Matters” rule unbalance my D&D 5e campaign?Would a PC with advantage on Intimidation and disadvantage on Charisma checks be balanced?
Is there a good way to store credentials outside of a password manager?
How can a function with a hole (removable discontinuity) equal a function with no hole?
How can I get through very long and very dry, but also very useful technical documents when learning a new tool?
How do I go from 300 unfinished/half written blog posts, to published posts?
Why does standard notation not preserve intervals (visually)
Return the Closest Prime Number
What is the difference between "behavior" and "behaviour"?
India just shot down a satellite from the ground. At what altitude range is the resulting debris field?
Can a caster that cast Polymorph on themselves stop concentrating at any point even if their Int is low?
Crossing the line between justified force and brutality
How long to clear the 'suck zone' of a turbofan after start is initiated?
Visit to the USA with ESTA approved before trip to Iran
How to disable updates in WordPress theme
% symbol leads to superlong (forever?) compilations
Would this house-rule that treats advantage as a +1 to the roll instead (and disadvantage as -1) and allows them to stack be balanced?
Does it take more energy to get to Venus or to Mars?
What is the meaning of "rider"?
Any way to transfer all permissions from one role to another?
What is the purpose of the Evocation wizard's Potent Cantrip feature?
Describing a person. What needs to be mentioned?
What is meant by a M next to a roman numeral?
Rotate a column
ls Ordering[Ordering[list]] optimal?
Can someone shed some light on this inequality?
Would this house-rule that treats advantage as a +1 to the roll instead (and disadvantage as -1) and allows them to stack be balanced?
The Next CEO of Stack OverflowHow does rolling two dice and taking the higher affect the average outcome?What are the implications of using AC rolls for defense?Is this house rule replacing encumbrance balanced?Is this proposed Spyglass house-rule balanced?How does the “Handling Mobs” rule work with Advantage & Disadvantage?Advantage on damage rolls - is it still balanced?How would changing critical hits like this affect my game?What are the balance effects of counting instances granting Advantage and Disadvantage to determine Advantage?Is this alternative initiative house-rule balanced?Will Open Legend’s “Every Roll Matters” rule unbalance my D&D 5e campaign?Would a PC with advantage on Intimidation and disadvantage on Charisma checks be balanced?
$begingroup$
I've been playing Open Legend RPG and I love that the Advantage in that game can be stacked. I love it when players try to strategize and stack as much advantage as possible.
I want to do this in D&D, but triple advantage doesn't really differ much from normal advantage. So, I was thinking of giving a +1 modifier for advantage instead of a double roll. This way players can stack +1 for every clever thing they do.
Will this work or will this throw D&D off balance? Any idea?
PS. Disadvantage could stack as well with -1s.
dnd-5e house-rules advantage-and-disadvantage stacking open-legend
New contributor
Dnial Khastalani is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
I've been playing Open Legend RPG and I love that the Advantage in that game can be stacked. I love it when players try to strategize and stack as much advantage as possible.
I want to do this in D&D, but triple advantage doesn't really differ much from normal advantage. So, I was thinking of giving a +1 modifier for advantage instead of a double roll. This way players can stack +1 for every clever thing they do.
Will this work or will this throw D&D off balance? Any idea?
PS. Disadvantage could stack as well with -1s.
dnd-5e house-rules advantage-and-disadvantage stacking open-legend
New contributor
Dnial Khastalani is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
Welcome! You can take the tour as an introduction to the site and check the help center for further guidance. Good luck and happy gaming!
$endgroup$
– Sdjz
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
This Q&A is related. Suggest you read up on that and perhaps revise your question.
$endgroup$
– KorvinStarmast
2 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@KorvinStarmast OP note that at this point there is no way for you to significantly revise the question without invalidating the answers. If it inspires you to a significantly new question, you are welcome to ask it as a new question.
$endgroup$
– Rubiksmoose
2 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@SnoringFrog Please see this meta for why your comment was removed. Thanks!
$endgroup$
– doppelgreener♦
1 hour ago
1
$begingroup$
My instinct is that triple/quad/etc advantage would actually be a bigger deal in D&D than it usually is in Open Legend. Sure you dont have exploding dice, but advantage on a d20 is better than advantage on a smaller die.
$endgroup$
– Tal
17 mins ago
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
I've been playing Open Legend RPG and I love that the Advantage in that game can be stacked. I love it when players try to strategize and stack as much advantage as possible.
I want to do this in D&D, but triple advantage doesn't really differ much from normal advantage. So, I was thinking of giving a +1 modifier for advantage instead of a double roll. This way players can stack +1 for every clever thing they do.
Will this work or will this throw D&D off balance? Any idea?
PS. Disadvantage could stack as well with -1s.
dnd-5e house-rules advantage-and-disadvantage stacking open-legend
New contributor
Dnial Khastalani is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$endgroup$
I've been playing Open Legend RPG and I love that the Advantage in that game can be stacked. I love it when players try to strategize and stack as much advantage as possible.
I want to do this in D&D, but triple advantage doesn't really differ much from normal advantage. So, I was thinking of giving a +1 modifier for advantage instead of a double roll. This way players can stack +1 for every clever thing they do.
Will this work or will this throw D&D off balance? Any idea?
PS. Disadvantage could stack as well with -1s.
dnd-5e house-rules advantage-and-disadvantage stacking open-legend
dnd-5e house-rules advantage-and-disadvantage stacking open-legend
New contributor
Dnial Khastalani is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
Dnial Khastalani is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
edited 12 mins ago
V2Blast
25.7k488158
25.7k488158
New contributor
Dnial Khastalani is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
asked 4 hours ago
Dnial KhastalaniDnial Khastalani
371
371
New contributor
Dnial Khastalani is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
New contributor
Dnial Khastalani is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
Dnial Khastalani is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.
$begingroup$
Welcome! You can take the tour as an introduction to the site and check the help center for further guidance. Good luck and happy gaming!
$endgroup$
– Sdjz
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
This Q&A is related. Suggest you read up on that and perhaps revise your question.
$endgroup$
– KorvinStarmast
2 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@KorvinStarmast OP note that at this point there is no way for you to significantly revise the question without invalidating the answers. If it inspires you to a significantly new question, you are welcome to ask it as a new question.
$endgroup$
– Rubiksmoose
2 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@SnoringFrog Please see this meta for why your comment was removed. Thanks!
$endgroup$
– doppelgreener♦
1 hour ago
1
$begingroup$
My instinct is that triple/quad/etc advantage would actually be a bigger deal in D&D than it usually is in Open Legend. Sure you dont have exploding dice, but advantage on a d20 is better than advantage on a smaller die.
$endgroup$
– Tal
17 mins ago
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
Welcome! You can take the tour as an introduction to the site and check the help center for further guidance. Good luck and happy gaming!
$endgroup$
– Sdjz
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
This Q&A is related. Suggest you read up on that and perhaps revise your question.
$endgroup$
– KorvinStarmast
2 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@KorvinStarmast OP note that at this point there is no way for you to significantly revise the question without invalidating the answers. If it inspires you to a significantly new question, you are welcome to ask it as a new question.
$endgroup$
– Rubiksmoose
2 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@SnoringFrog Please see this meta for why your comment was removed. Thanks!
$endgroup$
– doppelgreener♦
1 hour ago
1
$begingroup$
My instinct is that triple/quad/etc advantage would actually be a bigger deal in D&D than it usually is in Open Legend. Sure you dont have exploding dice, but advantage on a d20 is better than advantage on a smaller die.
$endgroup$
– Tal
17 mins ago
$begingroup$
Welcome! You can take the tour as an introduction to the site and check the help center for further guidance. Good luck and happy gaming!
$endgroup$
– Sdjz
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
Welcome! You can take the tour as an introduction to the site and check the help center for further guidance. Good luck and happy gaming!
$endgroup$
– Sdjz
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
This Q&A is related. Suggest you read up on that and perhaps revise your question.
$endgroup$
– KorvinStarmast
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
This Q&A is related. Suggest you read up on that and perhaps revise your question.
$endgroup$
– KorvinStarmast
2 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
@KorvinStarmast OP note that at this point there is no way for you to significantly revise the question without invalidating the answers. If it inspires you to a significantly new question, you are welcome to ask it as a new question.
$endgroup$
– Rubiksmoose
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
@KorvinStarmast OP note that at this point there is no way for you to significantly revise the question without invalidating the answers. If it inspires you to a significantly new question, you are welcome to ask it as a new question.
$endgroup$
– Rubiksmoose
2 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
@SnoringFrog Please see this meta for why your comment was removed. Thanks!
$endgroup$
– doppelgreener♦
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
@SnoringFrog Please see this meta for why your comment was removed. Thanks!
$endgroup$
– doppelgreener♦
1 hour ago
1
1
$begingroup$
My instinct is that triple/quad/etc advantage would actually be a bigger deal in D&D than it usually is in Open Legend. Sure you dont have exploding dice, but advantage on a d20 is better than advantage on a smaller die.
$endgroup$
– Tal
17 mins ago
$begingroup$
My instinct is that triple/quad/etc advantage would actually be a bigger deal in D&D than it usually is in Open Legend. Sure you dont have exploding dice, but advantage on a d20 is better than advantage on a smaller die.
$endgroup$
– Tal
17 mins ago
|
show 2 more comments
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
This is going to be difficult to balance
Having advantage on a roll is roughly equal to having +5 to your roll, and having disadvantage is roughly equal to having -5 on your roll.
Your suggested change would require somebody to have 5 different sources of advantage to get the same bonus as they do now, which seems extremely difficult to get unless you start also house-ruling a lot of ways to get advantage.
And once you start houseruling a lot of ways to get advantage, to try and make up for advantage now being weaker, you're making special abilities that only work when you have advantage a lot stronger.
By changing just this one thing, you're very likely going to have to make a lot of extra changes that will break other parts of the balance.
$endgroup$
5
$begingroup$
This. Plus if the PCs do end up with many ways of stacking +1 bonuses all over the place then, aside from the difficulty of keeping track of it all, you could fall into the problem of older editions of the bonuses getting so high that it makes success or failure vary wildly on who gets all the +1s and who doesn't (one of the reasons 5th edition went with "bounded accuracy").
$endgroup$
– PJRZ
4 hours ago
3
$begingroup$
Can you cite or back up your first sentence in your answer please?
$endgroup$
– Rubiksmoose
4 hours ago
3
$begingroup$
I agree, that first sentence needs a citation. My back-of-the-napkin calculations show a +4 or higher bonus on a roll on average. That could be 5, or it could be a different number.
$endgroup$
– David Coffron
3 hours ago
3
$begingroup$
@Rubiksmoose The closest thing to a "citation" is that the rules state when doing passive checks to give +5/-5 for advantage/disadvantage. But yes, as David mentioned +4/-4 is more accurate.
$endgroup$
– Captain Man
1 hour ago
2
$begingroup$
@CaptainMan I appreciate the response, but this was directed at OP. I know various places and analyses that can be used to back the claim up kind of, but OP needs to add them to their answer, otherwise they are making an unsupported claim.
$endgroup$
– Rubiksmoose
1 hour ago
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
Giving a +1 modifier is, under the vast majority of circumstances, weaker than giving Advantage
Below is a table with two sets of Columns:
- The possible results for a regular D20 roll, no other modifiers
- The possible results for a D20 roll made with advantage, no other modifiers
beginarrayr
& & textNormal & & & textAdvantage & \
textOutcome & textOdds & text# of Trials & textOdds to Pass & textOdds & text# of Trials & textOdds to Pass
\ hline
text[1] & text5.000% & 1 & text100.000% & text0.250% & 1 & text100.000%\
text[2] & text5.000% & 1 & text95.000% & text0.750% & 3 & text99.750%\
text[3] & text5.000% & 1 & text90.000% & text1.250% & 5 & text99.000%\
text[4] & text5.000% & 1 & text85.000% & text1.750% & 7 & text97.750%\
text[5] & text5.000% & 1 & text80.000% & text2.250% & 9 & text96.000%\
text[6] & text5.000% & 1 & text75.000% & text2.750% & 11 & text93.750%\
text[7] & text5.000% & 1 & text70.000% & text3.250% & 13 & text91.000%\
text[8] & text5.000% & 1 & text65.000% & text3.750% & 15 & text87.750%\
text[9] & text5.000% & 1 & text60.000% & text4.250% & 17 & text84.000%\
text[10] & text5.000% & 1 & text55.000% & text4.750% & 19 & text79.750%\
text[11] & text5.000% & 1 & text50.000% & text5.250% & 21 & text75.000%\
text[12] & text5.000% & 1 & text45.000% & text5.750% & 23 & text69.750%\
text[13] & text5.000% & 1 & text40.000% & text6.250% & 25 & text64.000%\
text[14] & text5.000% & 1 & text35.000% & text6.750% & 27 & text57.750%\
text[15] & text5.000% & 1 & text30.000% & text7.250% & 29 & text51.000%\
text[16] & text5.000% & 1 & text25.000% & text7.750% & 31 & text43.750%\
text[17] & text5.000% & 1 & text20.000% & text8.250% & 33 & text36.000%\
text[18] & text5.000% & 1 & text15.000% & text8.750% & 35 & text27.750%\
text[19] & text5.000% & 1 & text10.000% & text9.250% & 37 & text19.000%\
text[20] & text5.000% & 1 & text5.000% & text9.750% & 39 & text9.750%\ hline
textAverage & 10.500 & & textAverage & 13.825
endarray
From these two tables, we can make a few casual observations:
- For a "coin-flip" roll, where a 10- fails and an 11+ succeeds, giving Advantage to someone is like giving them a +5 on their roll.
- Sidebar: the Player's Handbook (Passive Checks, page 175) specifically says to just give +5 to Passive checks that would otherwise have Advantage (or -5 for checks with Disadvantage)
- There are a few times where your variant might be better, but they're limited.
- The only time that giving someone +1 on their roll, which is what your system does, would be strictly better than having Advantage is if they would otherwise need to roll a natural 20 to succeed: in those circumstances, their odds improve from 5%→10%, whereas with normal Advantage, they'd go 5%→9.75%.
- For two sources of Advantage, they'd need to be facing a check that requires at least a natural 19 (10%→20% with your system, 10%→19% with normal Advantage)
- For three sources of Advantage, they'd need to be facing a check that requires at least a natural 18 (15%→30% with your system, 15%→27.75% with normal Advantage)
- On the other side of the spectrum, a +1 bonus is only better than normal Advantage if the roller must roll a natural 1 to fail(5%→0% for your rule, 5%→0.25% for Advantage), a +2 is only better on a roll requiring a natural 2 to fail (10%→0%, 10%→1%), a +3 is only better on a roll requiring a natural 3 to fail (15%→0%, 15%→2.25%)
Under normal gameplay circumstances, having more than 3 sources of Advantage is, strictly speaking, incredibly unlikely. So as a consequence, replacing Advantage with a strict +1 (stacking) bonus is going to reduce the power of Advantage by a considerable amount.
You'll need to come up with rules for how to handle features like Elven Accuracy
Elven Accuracy, a feat that can be taken by Elves and Half-Elves, has a specific effect that plays off the nature of how Advantage affects rolls:
- [...]
- Whenever you have advantage on an attack roll using Dexterity, Intelligence, Wisdom, or Charisma, you can reroll one of the dice once.
—Elven Accuracy, Xanathar's Guide to Everything, pg. 74
So if you allow characters in your campaign to take this feat, or any feat that has similar effects on an Advantage roll, you'll need to make a decision about how this feat should behave under these circumstances, bearing in mind that being given the option to reroll a single die is far less powerful than being able to do so when it is paired with another die in an Advantage roll.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I've done the same calculation and can corroborate this result, can you please add equivalent documentation for disadvantage? I calculate expected value to be 7.175
$endgroup$
– Sean Scott
3 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
@SeanScott Your expected value is correct. I'm not sure it's necessary to include the Disadvantage stats as well, only because they are, in essence, perfectly symmetrical to the Advantage stats. Including them in this post doesn't really convey additional information. You're welcome to submit your own answer, copying the formatting/markup code for my table, if you want to add information for Disadvantage.
$endgroup$
– Xirema
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
That's ok, considered that right after I commented. Cheers!
$endgroup$
– Sean Scott
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
You've also missed the cases where they need to get at least a 1 (+1 means they can't fail, advantage means 1/400 chance in failing) and above a 20 (i.e. normally they can't make the check, with +1 they make it 5% of the time).
$endgroup$
– Snakes and Coffee
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Adding and subtracting values in the way that you have proposed is very much how 4th edition D&D worked. 5th edition has deliberately stepped away from that with the concept of "bounded accuracy".
The advantage/disadvantage system in 5e is designed to be simple and elegant. As someone who has played and DM'd both editions I really appreciate the simplicity of rolling two dice instead of doing a bunch of last-moment adding and subtracting. If your table really enjoys tactical combat and trying to finesse every angle then I suggest you try 4th edition out as it might appeal to you.
I don't think what you're proposing will work very well in 5th edition, as you can see in the graph in David's answer.
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
Just did a format thing to pull out your points and your experience. Added a link to David's graph to support your point. By all means, revert if you do not care for the edits.
$endgroup$
– KorvinStarmast
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
This makes one advantage significantly weaker and it becomes very difficult to reach enough advantages to compensate.
For demonstration purposes, let's take a standard d20 advantage roll minus a flat d20:

On average, this results in about +4 or higher as a benefit. This will require four stacked advantages before you get the approximate benefit of one advantage. You can read further on the effects of advantage in this Q&A.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
As an alternative, Adding d4 for single, d6 for double, and d8 for triple works nicely I think. Adding the d4 is slightly worse than normal advantage, d6 is about the same and d8 is a little better. One thing to note is that this allows rolling more than 20 total but even with the d8 it is only ~2.5% of the time. Charts: anydice.com/program/14427
$endgroup$
– Captain Man
1 hour ago
1
$begingroup$
@CaptainMan that might be worth it's own answer if you can provide a solid reasoning that clues the OP in to why this system would be balanced. I'd have to playtest it to be sure
$endgroup$
– David Coffron
1 hour ago
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["\$", "\$"]]);
);
);
, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "122"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Dnial Khastalani is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2frpg.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f144093%2fwould-this-house-rule-that-treats-advantage-as-a-1-to-the-roll-instead-and-dis%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
4 Answers
4
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
This is going to be difficult to balance
Having advantage on a roll is roughly equal to having +5 to your roll, and having disadvantage is roughly equal to having -5 on your roll.
Your suggested change would require somebody to have 5 different sources of advantage to get the same bonus as they do now, which seems extremely difficult to get unless you start also house-ruling a lot of ways to get advantage.
And once you start houseruling a lot of ways to get advantage, to try and make up for advantage now being weaker, you're making special abilities that only work when you have advantage a lot stronger.
By changing just this one thing, you're very likely going to have to make a lot of extra changes that will break other parts of the balance.
$endgroup$
5
$begingroup$
This. Plus if the PCs do end up with many ways of stacking +1 bonuses all over the place then, aside from the difficulty of keeping track of it all, you could fall into the problem of older editions of the bonuses getting so high that it makes success or failure vary wildly on who gets all the +1s and who doesn't (one of the reasons 5th edition went with "bounded accuracy").
$endgroup$
– PJRZ
4 hours ago
3
$begingroup$
Can you cite or back up your first sentence in your answer please?
$endgroup$
– Rubiksmoose
4 hours ago
3
$begingroup$
I agree, that first sentence needs a citation. My back-of-the-napkin calculations show a +4 or higher bonus on a roll on average. That could be 5, or it could be a different number.
$endgroup$
– David Coffron
3 hours ago
3
$begingroup$
@Rubiksmoose The closest thing to a "citation" is that the rules state when doing passive checks to give +5/-5 for advantage/disadvantage. But yes, as David mentioned +4/-4 is more accurate.
$endgroup$
– Captain Man
1 hour ago
2
$begingroup$
@CaptainMan I appreciate the response, but this was directed at OP. I know various places and analyses that can be used to back the claim up kind of, but OP needs to add them to their answer, otherwise they are making an unsupported claim.
$endgroup$
– Rubiksmoose
1 hour ago
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
This is going to be difficult to balance
Having advantage on a roll is roughly equal to having +5 to your roll, and having disadvantage is roughly equal to having -5 on your roll.
Your suggested change would require somebody to have 5 different sources of advantage to get the same bonus as they do now, which seems extremely difficult to get unless you start also house-ruling a lot of ways to get advantage.
And once you start houseruling a lot of ways to get advantage, to try and make up for advantage now being weaker, you're making special abilities that only work when you have advantage a lot stronger.
By changing just this one thing, you're very likely going to have to make a lot of extra changes that will break other parts of the balance.
$endgroup$
5
$begingroup$
This. Plus if the PCs do end up with many ways of stacking +1 bonuses all over the place then, aside from the difficulty of keeping track of it all, you could fall into the problem of older editions of the bonuses getting so high that it makes success or failure vary wildly on who gets all the +1s and who doesn't (one of the reasons 5th edition went with "bounded accuracy").
$endgroup$
– PJRZ
4 hours ago
3
$begingroup$
Can you cite or back up your first sentence in your answer please?
$endgroup$
– Rubiksmoose
4 hours ago
3
$begingroup$
I agree, that first sentence needs a citation. My back-of-the-napkin calculations show a +4 or higher bonus on a roll on average. That could be 5, or it could be a different number.
$endgroup$
– David Coffron
3 hours ago
3
$begingroup$
@Rubiksmoose The closest thing to a "citation" is that the rules state when doing passive checks to give +5/-5 for advantage/disadvantage. But yes, as David mentioned +4/-4 is more accurate.
$endgroup$
– Captain Man
1 hour ago
2
$begingroup$
@CaptainMan I appreciate the response, but this was directed at OP. I know various places and analyses that can be used to back the claim up kind of, but OP needs to add them to their answer, otherwise they are making an unsupported claim.
$endgroup$
– Rubiksmoose
1 hour ago
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
This is going to be difficult to balance
Having advantage on a roll is roughly equal to having +5 to your roll, and having disadvantage is roughly equal to having -5 on your roll.
Your suggested change would require somebody to have 5 different sources of advantage to get the same bonus as they do now, which seems extremely difficult to get unless you start also house-ruling a lot of ways to get advantage.
And once you start houseruling a lot of ways to get advantage, to try and make up for advantage now being weaker, you're making special abilities that only work when you have advantage a lot stronger.
By changing just this one thing, you're very likely going to have to make a lot of extra changes that will break other parts of the balance.
$endgroup$
This is going to be difficult to balance
Having advantage on a roll is roughly equal to having +5 to your roll, and having disadvantage is roughly equal to having -5 on your roll.
Your suggested change would require somebody to have 5 different sources of advantage to get the same bonus as they do now, which seems extremely difficult to get unless you start also house-ruling a lot of ways to get advantage.
And once you start houseruling a lot of ways to get advantage, to try and make up for advantage now being weaker, you're making special abilities that only work when you have advantage a lot stronger.
By changing just this one thing, you're very likely going to have to make a lot of extra changes that will break other parts of the balance.
answered 4 hours ago
TheikTheik
14.5k6081
14.5k6081
5
$begingroup$
This. Plus if the PCs do end up with many ways of stacking +1 bonuses all over the place then, aside from the difficulty of keeping track of it all, you could fall into the problem of older editions of the bonuses getting so high that it makes success or failure vary wildly on who gets all the +1s and who doesn't (one of the reasons 5th edition went with "bounded accuracy").
$endgroup$
– PJRZ
4 hours ago
3
$begingroup$
Can you cite or back up your first sentence in your answer please?
$endgroup$
– Rubiksmoose
4 hours ago
3
$begingroup$
I agree, that first sentence needs a citation. My back-of-the-napkin calculations show a +4 or higher bonus on a roll on average. That could be 5, or it could be a different number.
$endgroup$
– David Coffron
3 hours ago
3
$begingroup$
@Rubiksmoose The closest thing to a "citation" is that the rules state when doing passive checks to give +5/-5 for advantage/disadvantage. But yes, as David mentioned +4/-4 is more accurate.
$endgroup$
– Captain Man
1 hour ago
2
$begingroup$
@CaptainMan I appreciate the response, but this was directed at OP. I know various places and analyses that can be used to back the claim up kind of, but OP needs to add them to their answer, otherwise they are making an unsupported claim.
$endgroup$
– Rubiksmoose
1 hour ago
|
show 2 more comments
5
$begingroup$
This. Plus if the PCs do end up with many ways of stacking +1 bonuses all over the place then, aside from the difficulty of keeping track of it all, you could fall into the problem of older editions of the bonuses getting so high that it makes success or failure vary wildly on who gets all the +1s and who doesn't (one of the reasons 5th edition went with "bounded accuracy").
$endgroup$
– PJRZ
4 hours ago
3
$begingroup$
Can you cite or back up your first sentence in your answer please?
$endgroup$
– Rubiksmoose
4 hours ago
3
$begingroup$
I agree, that first sentence needs a citation. My back-of-the-napkin calculations show a +4 or higher bonus on a roll on average. That could be 5, or it could be a different number.
$endgroup$
– David Coffron
3 hours ago
3
$begingroup$
@Rubiksmoose The closest thing to a "citation" is that the rules state when doing passive checks to give +5/-5 for advantage/disadvantage. But yes, as David mentioned +4/-4 is more accurate.
$endgroup$
– Captain Man
1 hour ago
2
$begingroup$
@CaptainMan I appreciate the response, but this was directed at OP. I know various places and analyses that can be used to back the claim up kind of, but OP needs to add them to their answer, otherwise they are making an unsupported claim.
$endgroup$
– Rubiksmoose
1 hour ago
5
5
$begingroup$
This. Plus if the PCs do end up with many ways of stacking +1 bonuses all over the place then, aside from the difficulty of keeping track of it all, you could fall into the problem of older editions of the bonuses getting so high that it makes success or failure vary wildly on who gets all the +1s and who doesn't (one of the reasons 5th edition went with "bounded accuracy").
$endgroup$
– PJRZ
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
This. Plus if the PCs do end up with many ways of stacking +1 bonuses all over the place then, aside from the difficulty of keeping track of it all, you could fall into the problem of older editions of the bonuses getting so high that it makes success or failure vary wildly on who gets all the +1s and who doesn't (one of the reasons 5th edition went with "bounded accuracy").
$endgroup$
– PJRZ
4 hours ago
3
3
$begingroup$
Can you cite or back up your first sentence in your answer please?
$endgroup$
– Rubiksmoose
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
Can you cite or back up your first sentence in your answer please?
$endgroup$
– Rubiksmoose
4 hours ago
3
3
$begingroup$
I agree, that first sentence needs a citation. My back-of-the-napkin calculations show a +4 or higher bonus on a roll on average. That could be 5, or it could be a different number.
$endgroup$
– David Coffron
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
I agree, that first sentence needs a citation. My back-of-the-napkin calculations show a +4 or higher bonus on a roll on average. That could be 5, or it could be a different number.
$endgroup$
– David Coffron
3 hours ago
3
3
$begingroup$
@Rubiksmoose The closest thing to a "citation" is that the rules state when doing passive checks to give +5/-5 for advantage/disadvantage. But yes, as David mentioned +4/-4 is more accurate.
$endgroup$
– Captain Man
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
@Rubiksmoose The closest thing to a "citation" is that the rules state when doing passive checks to give +5/-5 for advantage/disadvantage. But yes, as David mentioned +4/-4 is more accurate.
$endgroup$
– Captain Man
1 hour ago
2
2
$begingroup$
@CaptainMan I appreciate the response, but this was directed at OP. I know various places and analyses that can be used to back the claim up kind of, but OP needs to add them to their answer, otherwise they are making an unsupported claim.
$endgroup$
– Rubiksmoose
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
@CaptainMan I appreciate the response, but this was directed at OP. I know various places and analyses that can be used to back the claim up kind of, but OP needs to add them to their answer, otherwise they are making an unsupported claim.
$endgroup$
– Rubiksmoose
1 hour ago
|
show 2 more comments
$begingroup$
Giving a +1 modifier is, under the vast majority of circumstances, weaker than giving Advantage
Below is a table with two sets of Columns:
- The possible results for a regular D20 roll, no other modifiers
- The possible results for a D20 roll made with advantage, no other modifiers
beginarrayr
& & textNormal & & & textAdvantage & \
textOutcome & textOdds & text# of Trials & textOdds to Pass & textOdds & text# of Trials & textOdds to Pass
\ hline
text[1] & text5.000% & 1 & text100.000% & text0.250% & 1 & text100.000%\
text[2] & text5.000% & 1 & text95.000% & text0.750% & 3 & text99.750%\
text[3] & text5.000% & 1 & text90.000% & text1.250% & 5 & text99.000%\
text[4] & text5.000% & 1 & text85.000% & text1.750% & 7 & text97.750%\
text[5] & text5.000% & 1 & text80.000% & text2.250% & 9 & text96.000%\
text[6] & text5.000% & 1 & text75.000% & text2.750% & 11 & text93.750%\
text[7] & text5.000% & 1 & text70.000% & text3.250% & 13 & text91.000%\
text[8] & text5.000% & 1 & text65.000% & text3.750% & 15 & text87.750%\
text[9] & text5.000% & 1 & text60.000% & text4.250% & 17 & text84.000%\
text[10] & text5.000% & 1 & text55.000% & text4.750% & 19 & text79.750%\
text[11] & text5.000% & 1 & text50.000% & text5.250% & 21 & text75.000%\
text[12] & text5.000% & 1 & text45.000% & text5.750% & 23 & text69.750%\
text[13] & text5.000% & 1 & text40.000% & text6.250% & 25 & text64.000%\
text[14] & text5.000% & 1 & text35.000% & text6.750% & 27 & text57.750%\
text[15] & text5.000% & 1 & text30.000% & text7.250% & 29 & text51.000%\
text[16] & text5.000% & 1 & text25.000% & text7.750% & 31 & text43.750%\
text[17] & text5.000% & 1 & text20.000% & text8.250% & 33 & text36.000%\
text[18] & text5.000% & 1 & text15.000% & text8.750% & 35 & text27.750%\
text[19] & text5.000% & 1 & text10.000% & text9.250% & 37 & text19.000%\
text[20] & text5.000% & 1 & text5.000% & text9.750% & 39 & text9.750%\ hline
textAverage & 10.500 & & textAverage & 13.825
endarray
From these two tables, we can make a few casual observations:
- For a "coin-flip" roll, where a 10- fails and an 11+ succeeds, giving Advantage to someone is like giving them a +5 on their roll.
- Sidebar: the Player's Handbook (Passive Checks, page 175) specifically says to just give +5 to Passive checks that would otherwise have Advantage (or -5 for checks with Disadvantage)
- There are a few times where your variant might be better, but they're limited.
- The only time that giving someone +1 on their roll, which is what your system does, would be strictly better than having Advantage is if they would otherwise need to roll a natural 20 to succeed: in those circumstances, their odds improve from 5%→10%, whereas with normal Advantage, they'd go 5%→9.75%.
- For two sources of Advantage, they'd need to be facing a check that requires at least a natural 19 (10%→20% with your system, 10%→19% with normal Advantage)
- For three sources of Advantage, they'd need to be facing a check that requires at least a natural 18 (15%→30% with your system, 15%→27.75% with normal Advantage)
- On the other side of the spectrum, a +1 bonus is only better than normal Advantage if the roller must roll a natural 1 to fail(5%→0% for your rule, 5%→0.25% for Advantage), a +2 is only better on a roll requiring a natural 2 to fail (10%→0%, 10%→1%), a +3 is only better on a roll requiring a natural 3 to fail (15%→0%, 15%→2.25%)
Under normal gameplay circumstances, having more than 3 sources of Advantage is, strictly speaking, incredibly unlikely. So as a consequence, replacing Advantage with a strict +1 (stacking) bonus is going to reduce the power of Advantage by a considerable amount.
You'll need to come up with rules for how to handle features like Elven Accuracy
Elven Accuracy, a feat that can be taken by Elves and Half-Elves, has a specific effect that plays off the nature of how Advantage affects rolls:
- [...]
- Whenever you have advantage on an attack roll using Dexterity, Intelligence, Wisdom, or Charisma, you can reroll one of the dice once.
—Elven Accuracy, Xanathar's Guide to Everything, pg. 74
So if you allow characters in your campaign to take this feat, or any feat that has similar effects on an Advantage roll, you'll need to make a decision about how this feat should behave under these circumstances, bearing in mind that being given the option to reroll a single die is far less powerful than being able to do so when it is paired with another die in an Advantage roll.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I've done the same calculation and can corroborate this result, can you please add equivalent documentation for disadvantage? I calculate expected value to be 7.175
$endgroup$
– Sean Scott
3 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
@SeanScott Your expected value is correct. I'm not sure it's necessary to include the Disadvantage stats as well, only because they are, in essence, perfectly symmetrical to the Advantage stats. Including them in this post doesn't really convey additional information. You're welcome to submit your own answer, copying the formatting/markup code for my table, if you want to add information for Disadvantage.
$endgroup$
– Xirema
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
That's ok, considered that right after I commented. Cheers!
$endgroup$
– Sean Scott
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
You've also missed the cases where they need to get at least a 1 (+1 means they can't fail, advantage means 1/400 chance in failing) and above a 20 (i.e. normally they can't make the check, with +1 they make it 5% of the time).
$endgroup$
– Snakes and Coffee
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Giving a +1 modifier is, under the vast majority of circumstances, weaker than giving Advantage
Below is a table with two sets of Columns:
- The possible results for a regular D20 roll, no other modifiers
- The possible results for a D20 roll made with advantage, no other modifiers
beginarrayr
& & textNormal & & & textAdvantage & \
textOutcome & textOdds & text# of Trials & textOdds to Pass & textOdds & text# of Trials & textOdds to Pass
\ hline
text[1] & text5.000% & 1 & text100.000% & text0.250% & 1 & text100.000%\
text[2] & text5.000% & 1 & text95.000% & text0.750% & 3 & text99.750%\
text[3] & text5.000% & 1 & text90.000% & text1.250% & 5 & text99.000%\
text[4] & text5.000% & 1 & text85.000% & text1.750% & 7 & text97.750%\
text[5] & text5.000% & 1 & text80.000% & text2.250% & 9 & text96.000%\
text[6] & text5.000% & 1 & text75.000% & text2.750% & 11 & text93.750%\
text[7] & text5.000% & 1 & text70.000% & text3.250% & 13 & text91.000%\
text[8] & text5.000% & 1 & text65.000% & text3.750% & 15 & text87.750%\
text[9] & text5.000% & 1 & text60.000% & text4.250% & 17 & text84.000%\
text[10] & text5.000% & 1 & text55.000% & text4.750% & 19 & text79.750%\
text[11] & text5.000% & 1 & text50.000% & text5.250% & 21 & text75.000%\
text[12] & text5.000% & 1 & text45.000% & text5.750% & 23 & text69.750%\
text[13] & text5.000% & 1 & text40.000% & text6.250% & 25 & text64.000%\
text[14] & text5.000% & 1 & text35.000% & text6.750% & 27 & text57.750%\
text[15] & text5.000% & 1 & text30.000% & text7.250% & 29 & text51.000%\
text[16] & text5.000% & 1 & text25.000% & text7.750% & 31 & text43.750%\
text[17] & text5.000% & 1 & text20.000% & text8.250% & 33 & text36.000%\
text[18] & text5.000% & 1 & text15.000% & text8.750% & 35 & text27.750%\
text[19] & text5.000% & 1 & text10.000% & text9.250% & 37 & text19.000%\
text[20] & text5.000% & 1 & text5.000% & text9.750% & 39 & text9.750%\ hline
textAverage & 10.500 & & textAverage & 13.825
endarray
From these two tables, we can make a few casual observations:
- For a "coin-flip" roll, where a 10- fails and an 11+ succeeds, giving Advantage to someone is like giving them a +5 on their roll.
- Sidebar: the Player's Handbook (Passive Checks, page 175) specifically says to just give +5 to Passive checks that would otherwise have Advantage (or -5 for checks with Disadvantage)
- There are a few times where your variant might be better, but they're limited.
- The only time that giving someone +1 on their roll, which is what your system does, would be strictly better than having Advantage is if they would otherwise need to roll a natural 20 to succeed: in those circumstances, their odds improve from 5%→10%, whereas with normal Advantage, they'd go 5%→9.75%.
- For two sources of Advantage, they'd need to be facing a check that requires at least a natural 19 (10%→20% with your system, 10%→19% with normal Advantage)
- For three sources of Advantage, they'd need to be facing a check that requires at least a natural 18 (15%→30% with your system, 15%→27.75% with normal Advantage)
- On the other side of the spectrum, a +1 bonus is only better than normal Advantage if the roller must roll a natural 1 to fail(5%→0% for your rule, 5%→0.25% for Advantage), a +2 is only better on a roll requiring a natural 2 to fail (10%→0%, 10%→1%), a +3 is only better on a roll requiring a natural 3 to fail (15%→0%, 15%→2.25%)
Under normal gameplay circumstances, having more than 3 sources of Advantage is, strictly speaking, incredibly unlikely. So as a consequence, replacing Advantage with a strict +1 (stacking) bonus is going to reduce the power of Advantage by a considerable amount.
You'll need to come up with rules for how to handle features like Elven Accuracy
Elven Accuracy, a feat that can be taken by Elves and Half-Elves, has a specific effect that plays off the nature of how Advantage affects rolls:
- [...]
- Whenever you have advantage on an attack roll using Dexterity, Intelligence, Wisdom, or Charisma, you can reroll one of the dice once.
—Elven Accuracy, Xanathar's Guide to Everything, pg. 74
So if you allow characters in your campaign to take this feat, or any feat that has similar effects on an Advantage roll, you'll need to make a decision about how this feat should behave under these circumstances, bearing in mind that being given the option to reroll a single die is far less powerful than being able to do so when it is paired with another die in an Advantage roll.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I've done the same calculation and can corroborate this result, can you please add equivalent documentation for disadvantage? I calculate expected value to be 7.175
$endgroup$
– Sean Scott
3 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
@SeanScott Your expected value is correct. I'm not sure it's necessary to include the Disadvantage stats as well, only because they are, in essence, perfectly symmetrical to the Advantage stats. Including them in this post doesn't really convey additional information. You're welcome to submit your own answer, copying the formatting/markup code for my table, if you want to add information for Disadvantage.
$endgroup$
– Xirema
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
That's ok, considered that right after I commented. Cheers!
$endgroup$
– Sean Scott
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
You've also missed the cases where they need to get at least a 1 (+1 means they can't fail, advantage means 1/400 chance in failing) and above a 20 (i.e. normally they can't make the check, with +1 they make it 5% of the time).
$endgroup$
– Snakes and Coffee
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Giving a +1 modifier is, under the vast majority of circumstances, weaker than giving Advantage
Below is a table with two sets of Columns:
- The possible results for a regular D20 roll, no other modifiers
- The possible results for a D20 roll made with advantage, no other modifiers
beginarrayr
& & textNormal & & & textAdvantage & \
textOutcome & textOdds & text# of Trials & textOdds to Pass & textOdds & text# of Trials & textOdds to Pass
\ hline
text[1] & text5.000% & 1 & text100.000% & text0.250% & 1 & text100.000%\
text[2] & text5.000% & 1 & text95.000% & text0.750% & 3 & text99.750%\
text[3] & text5.000% & 1 & text90.000% & text1.250% & 5 & text99.000%\
text[4] & text5.000% & 1 & text85.000% & text1.750% & 7 & text97.750%\
text[5] & text5.000% & 1 & text80.000% & text2.250% & 9 & text96.000%\
text[6] & text5.000% & 1 & text75.000% & text2.750% & 11 & text93.750%\
text[7] & text5.000% & 1 & text70.000% & text3.250% & 13 & text91.000%\
text[8] & text5.000% & 1 & text65.000% & text3.750% & 15 & text87.750%\
text[9] & text5.000% & 1 & text60.000% & text4.250% & 17 & text84.000%\
text[10] & text5.000% & 1 & text55.000% & text4.750% & 19 & text79.750%\
text[11] & text5.000% & 1 & text50.000% & text5.250% & 21 & text75.000%\
text[12] & text5.000% & 1 & text45.000% & text5.750% & 23 & text69.750%\
text[13] & text5.000% & 1 & text40.000% & text6.250% & 25 & text64.000%\
text[14] & text5.000% & 1 & text35.000% & text6.750% & 27 & text57.750%\
text[15] & text5.000% & 1 & text30.000% & text7.250% & 29 & text51.000%\
text[16] & text5.000% & 1 & text25.000% & text7.750% & 31 & text43.750%\
text[17] & text5.000% & 1 & text20.000% & text8.250% & 33 & text36.000%\
text[18] & text5.000% & 1 & text15.000% & text8.750% & 35 & text27.750%\
text[19] & text5.000% & 1 & text10.000% & text9.250% & 37 & text19.000%\
text[20] & text5.000% & 1 & text5.000% & text9.750% & 39 & text9.750%\ hline
textAverage & 10.500 & & textAverage & 13.825
endarray
From these two tables, we can make a few casual observations:
- For a "coin-flip" roll, where a 10- fails and an 11+ succeeds, giving Advantage to someone is like giving them a +5 on their roll.
- Sidebar: the Player's Handbook (Passive Checks, page 175) specifically says to just give +5 to Passive checks that would otherwise have Advantage (or -5 for checks with Disadvantage)
- There are a few times where your variant might be better, but they're limited.
- The only time that giving someone +1 on their roll, which is what your system does, would be strictly better than having Advantage is if they would otherwise need to roll a natural 20 to succeed: in those circumstances, their odds improve from 5%→10%, whereas with normal Advantage, they'd go 5%→9.75%.
- For two sources of Advantage, they'd need to be facing a check that requires at least a natural 19 (10%→20% with your system, 10%→19% with normal Advantage)
- For three sources of Advantage, they'd need to be facing a check that requires at least a natural 18 (15%→30% with your system, 15%→27.75% with normal Advantage)
- On the other side of the spectrum, a +1 bonus is only better than normal Advantage if the roller must roll a natural 1 to fail(5%→0% for your rule, 5%→0.25% for Advantage), a +2 is only better on a roll requiring a natural 2 to fail (10%→0%, 10%→1%), a +3 is only better on a roll requiring a natural 3 to fail (15%→0%, 15%→2.25%)
Under normal gameplay circumstances, having more than 3 sources of Advantage is, strictly speaking, incredibly unlikely. So as a consequence, replacing Advantage with a strict +1 (stacking) bonus is going to reduce the power of Advantage by a considerable amount.
You'll need to come up with rules for how to handle features like Elven Accuracy
Elven Accuracy, a feat that can be taken by Elves and Half-Elves, has a specific effect that plays off the nature of how Advantage affects rolls:
- [...]
- Whenever you have advantage on an attack roll using Dexterity, Intelligence, Wisdom, or Charisma, you can reroll one of the dice once.
—Elven Accuracy, Xanathar's Guide to Everything, pg. 74
So if you allow characters in your campaign to take this feat, or any feat that has similar effects on an Advantage roll, you'll need to make a decision about how this feat should behave under these circumstances, bearing in mind that being given the option to reroll a single die is far less powerful than being able to do so when it is paired with another die in an Advantage roll.
$endgroup$
Giving a +1 modifier is, under the vast majority of circumstances, weaker than giving Advantage
Below is a table with two sets of Columns:
- The possible results for a regular D20 roll, no other modifiers
- The possible results for a D20 roll made with advantage, no other modifiers
beginarrayr
& & textNormal & & & textAdvantage & \
textOutcome & textOdds & text# of Trials & textOdds to Pass & textOdds & text# of Trials & textOdds to Pass
\ hline
text[1] & text5.000% & 1 & text100.000% & text0.250% & 1 & text100.000%\
text[2] & text5.000% & 1 & text95.000% & text0.750% & 3 & text99.750%\
text[3] & text5.000% & 1 & text90.000% & text1.250% & 5 & text99.000%\
text[4] & text5.000% & 1 & text85.000% & text1.750% & 7 & text97.750%\
text[5] & text5.000% & 1 & text80.000% & text2.250% & 9 & text96.000%\
text[6] & text5.000% & 1 & text75.000% & text2.750% & 11 & text93.750%\
text[7] & text5.000% & 1 & text70.000% & text3.250% & 13 & text91.000%\
text[8] & text5.000% & 1 & text65.000% & text3.750% & 15 & text87.750%\
text[9] & text5.000% & 1 & text60.000% & text4.250% & 17 & text84.000%\
text[10] & text5.000% & 1 & text55.000% & text4.750% & 19 & text79.750%\
text[11] & text5.000% & 1 & text50.000% & text5.250% & 21 & text75.000%\
text[12] & text5.000% & 1 & text45.000% & text5.750% & 23 & text69.750%\
text[13] & text5.000% & 1 & text40.000% & text6.250% & 25 & text64.000%\
text[14] & text5.000% & 1 & text35.000% & text6.750% & 27 & text57.750%\
text[15] & text5.000% & 1 & text30.000% & text7.250% & 29 & text51.000%\
text[16] & text5.000% & 1 & text25.000% & text7.750% & 31 & text43.750%\
text[17] & text5.000% & 1 & text20.000% & text8.250% & 33 & text36.000%\
text[18] & text5.000% & 1 & text15.000% & text8.750% & 35 & text27.750%\
text[19] & text5.000% & 1 & text10.000% & text9.250% & 37 & text19.000%\
text[20] & text5.000% & 1 & text5.000% & text9.750% & 39 & text9.750%\ hline
textAverage & 10.500 & & textAverage & 13.825
endarray
From these two tables, we can make a few casual observations:
- For a "coin-flip" roll, where a 10- fails and an 11+ succeeds, giving Advantage to someone is like giving them a +5 on their roll.
- Sidebar: the Player's Handbook (Passive Checks, page 175) specifically says to just give +5 to Passive checks that would otherwise have Advantage (or -5 for checks with Disadvantage)
- There are a few times where your variant might be better, but they're limited.
- The only time that giving someone +1 on their roll, which is what your system does, would be strictly better than having Advantage is if they would otherwise need to roll a natural 20 to succeed: in those circumstances, their odds improve from 5%→10%, whereas with normal Advantage, they'd go 5%→9.75%.
- For two sources of Advantage, they'd need to be facing a check that requires at least a natural 19 (10%→20% with your system, 10%→19% with normal Advantage)
- For three sources of Advantage, they'd need to be facing a check that requires at least a natural 18 (15%→30% with your system, 15%→27.75% with normal Advantage)
- On the other side of the spectrum, a +1 bonus is only better than normal Advantage if the roller must roll a natural 1 to fail(5%→0% for your rule, 5%→0.25% for Advantage), a +2 is only better on a roll requiring a natural 2 to fail (10%→0%, 10%→1%), a +3 is only better on a roll requiring a natural 3 to fail (15%→0%, 15%→2.25%)
Under normal gameplay circumstances, having more than 3 sources of Advantage is, strictly speaking, incredibly unlikely. So as a consequence, replacing Advantage with a strict +1 (stacking) bonus is going to reduce the power of Advantage by a considerable amount.
You'll need to come up with rules for how to handle features like Elven Accuracy
Elven Accuracy, a feat that can be taken by Elves and Half-Elves, has a specific effect that plays off the nature of how Advantage affects rolls:
- [...]
- Whenever you have advantage on an attack roll using Dexterity, Intelligence, Wisdom, or Charisma, you can reroll one of the dice once.
—Elven Accuracy, Xanathar's Guide to Everything, pg. 74
So if you allow characters in your campaign to take this feat, or any feat that has similar effects on an Advantage roll, you'll need to make a decision about how this feat should behave under these circumstances, bearing in mind that being given the option to reroll a single die is far less powerful than being able to do so when it is paired with another die in an Advantage roll.
edited 44 mins ago
answered 3 hours ago
XiremaXirema
22.7k266132
22.7k266132
$begingroup$
I've done the same calculation and can corroborate this result, can you please add equivalent documentation for disadvantage? I calculate expected value to be 7.175
$endgroup$
– Sean Scott
3 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
@SeanScott Your expected value is correct. I'm not sure it's necessary to include the Disadvantage stats as well, only because they are, in essence, perfectly symmetrical to the Advantage stats. Including them in this post doesn't really convey additional information. You're welcome to submit your own answer, copying the formatting/markup code for my table, if you want to add information for Disadvantage.
$endgroup$
– Xirema
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
That's ok, considered that right after I commented. Cheers!
$endgroup$
– Sean Scott
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
You've also missed the cases where they need to get at least a 1 (+1 means they can't fail, advantage means 1/400 chance in failing) and above a 20 (i.e. normally they can't make the check, with +1 they make it 5% of the time).
$endgroup$
– Snakes and Coffee
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I've done the same calculation and can corroborate this result, can you please add equivalent documentation for disadvantage? I calculate expected value to be 7.175
$endgroup$
– Sean Scott
3 hours ago
2
$begingroup$
@SeanScott Your expected value is correct. I'm not sure it's necessary to include the Disadvantage stats as well, only because they are, in essence, perfectly symmetrical to the Advantage stats. Including them in this post doesn't really convey additional information. You're welcome to submit your own answer, copying the formatting/markup code for my table, if you want to add information for Disadvantage.
$endgroup$
– Xirema
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
That's ok, considered that right after I commented. Cheers!
$endgroup$
– Sean Scott
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
You've also missed the cases where they need to get at least a 1 (+1 means they can't fail, advantage means 1/400 chance in failing) and above a 20 (i.e. normally they can't make the check, with +1 they make it 5% of the time).
$endgroup$
– Snakes and Coffee
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
I've done the same calculation and can corroborate this result, can you please add equivalent documentation for disadvantage? I calculate expected value to be 7.175
$endgroup$
– Sean Scott
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
I've done the same calculation and can corroborate this result, can you please add equivalent documentation for disadvantage? I calculate expected value to be 7.175
$endgroup$
– Sean Scott
3 hours ago
2
2
$begingroup$
@SeanScott Your expected value is correct. I'm not sure it's necessary to include the Disadvantage stats as well, only because they are, in essence, perfectly symmetrical to the Advantage stats. Including them in this post doesn't really convey additional information. You're welcome to submit your own answer, copying the formatting/markup code for my table, if you want to add information for Disadvantage.
$endgroup$
– Xirema
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
@SeanScott Your expected value is correct. I'm not sure it's necessary to include the Disadvantage stats as well, only because they are, in essence, perfectly symmetrical to the Advantage stats. Including them in this post doesn't really convey additional information. You're welcome to submit your own answer, copying the formatting/markup code for my table, if you want to add information for Disadvantage.
$endgroup$
– Xirema
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
That's ok, considered that right after I commented. Cheers!
$endgroup$
– Sean Scott
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
That's ok, considered that right after I commented. Cheers!
$endgroup$
– Sean Scott
3 hours ago
$begingroup$
You've also missed the cases where they need to get at least a 1 (+1 means they can't fail, advantage means 1/400 chance in failing) and above a 20 (i.e. normally they can't make the check, with +1 they make it 5% of the time).
$endgroup$
– Snakes and Coffee
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
You've also missed the cases where they need to get at least a 1 (+1 means they can't fail, advantage means 1/400 chance in failing) and above a 20 (i.e. normally they can't make the check, with +1 they make it 5% of the time).
$endgroup$
– Snakes and Coffee
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Adding and subtracting values in the way that you have proposed is very much how 4th edition D&D worked. 5th edition has deliberately stepped away from that with the concept of "bounded accuracy".
The advantage/disadvantage system in 5e is designed to be simple and elegant. As someone who has played and DM'd both editions I really appreciate the simplicity of rolling two dice instead of doing a bunch of last-moment adding and subtracting. If your table really enjoys tactical combat and trying to finesse every angle then I suggest you try 4th edition out as it might appeal to you.
I don't think what you're proposing will work very well in 5th edition, as you can see in the graph in David's answer.
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
Just did a format thing to pull out your points and your experience. Added a link to David's graph to support your point. By all means, revert if you do not care for the edits.
$endgroup$
– KorvinStarmast
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Adding and subtracting values in the way that you have proposed is very much how 4th edition D&D worked. 5th edition has deliberately stepped away from that with the concept of "bounded accuracy".
The advantage/disadvantage system in 5e is designed to be simple and elegant. As someone who has played and DM'd both editions I really appreciate the simplicity of rolling two dice instead of doing a bunch of last-moment adding and subtracting. If your table really enjoys tactical combat and trying to finesse every angle then I suggest you try 4th edition out as it might appeal to you.
I don't think what you're proposing will work very well in 5th edition, as you can see in the graph in David's answer.
$endgroup$
1
$begingroup$
Just did a format thing to pull out your points and your experience. Added a link to David's graph to support your point. By all means, revert if you do not care for the edits.
$endgroup$
– KorvinStarmast
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
Adding and subtracting values in the way that you have proposed is very much how 4th edition D&D worked. 5th edition has deliberately stepped away from that with the concept of "bounded accuracy".
The advantage/disadvantage system in 5e is designed to be simple and elegant. As someone who has played and DM'd both editions I really appreciate the simplicity of rolling two dice instead of doing a bunch of last-moment adding and subtracting. If your table really enjoys tactical combat and trying to finesse every angle then I suggest you try 4th edition out as it might appeal to you.
I don't think what you're proposing will work very well in 5th edition, as you can see in the graph in David's answer.
$endgroup$
Adding and subtracting values in the way that you have proposed is very much how 4th edition D&D worked. 5th edition has deliberately stepped away from that with the concept of "bounded accuracy".
The advantage/disadvantage system in 5e is designed to be simple and elegant. As someone who has played and DM'd both editions I really appreciate the simplicity of rolling two dice instead of doing a bunch of last-moment adding and subtracting. If your table really enjoys tactical combat and trying to finesse every angle then I suggest you try 4th edition out as it might appeal to you.
I don't think what you're proposing will work very well in 5th edition, as you can see in the graph in David's answer.
edited 2 hours ago
KorvinStarmast
82.6k20257444
82.6k20257444
answered 2 hours ago
Dorian BaldwinDorian Baldwin
1112
1112
1
$begingroup$
Just did a format thing to pull out your points and your experience. Added a link to David's graph to support your point. By all means, revert if you do not care for the edits.
$endgroup$
– KorvinStarmast
2 hours ago
add a comment |
1
$begingroup$
Just did a format thing to pull out your points and your experience. Added a link to David's graph to support your point. By all means, revert if you do not care for the edits.
$endgroup$
– KorvinStarmast
2 hours ago
1
1
$begingroup$
Just did a format thing to pull out your points and your experience. Added a link to David's graph to support your point. By all means, revert if you do not care for the edits.
$endgroup$
– KorvinStarmast
2 hours ago
$begingroup$
Just did a format thing to pull out your points and your experience. Added a link to David's graph to support your point. By all means, revert if you do not care for the edits.
$endgroup$
– KorvinStarmast
2 hours ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
This makes one advantage significantly weaker and it becomes very difficult to reach enough advantages to compensate.
For demonstration purposes, let's take a standard d20 advantage roll minus a flat d20:

On average, this results in about +4 or higher as a benefit. This will require four stacked advantages before you get the approximate benefit of one advantage. You can read further on the effects of advantage in this Q&A.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
As an alternative, Adding d4 for single, d6 for double, and d8 for triple works nicely I think. Adding the d4 is slightly worse than normal advantage, d6 is about the same and d8 is a little better. One thing to note is that this allows rolling more than 20 total but even with the d8 it is only ~2.5% of the time. Charts: anydice.com/program/14427
$endgroup$
– Captain Man
1 hour ago
1
$begingroup$
@CaptainMan that might be worth it's own answer if you can provide a solid reasoning that clues the OP in to why this system would be balanced. I'd have to playtest it to be sure
$endgroup$
– David Coffron
1 hour ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
This makes one advantage significantly weaker and it becomes very difficult to reach enough advantages to compensate.
For demonstration purposes, let's take a standard d20 advantage roll minus a flat d20:

On average, this results in about +4 or higher as a benefit. This will require four stacked advantages before you get the approximate benefit of one advantage. You can read further on the effects of advantage in this Q&A.
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
As an alternative, Adding d4 for single, d6 for double, and d8 for triple works nicely I think. Adding the d4 is slightly worse than normal advantage, d6 is about the same and d8 is a little better. One thing to note is that this allows rolling more than 20 total but even with the d8 it is only ~2.5% of the time. Charts: anydice.com/program/14427
$endgroup$
– Captain Man
1 hour ago
1
$begingroup$
@CaptainMan that might be worth it's own answer if you can provide a solid reasoning that clues the OP in to why this system would be balanced. I'd have to playtest it to be sure
$endgroup$
– David Coffron
1 hour ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
This makes one advantage significantly weaker and it becomes very difficult to reach enough advantages to compensate.
For demonstration purposes, let's take a standard d20 advantage roll minus a flat d20:

On average, this results in about +4 or higher as a benefit. This will require four stacked advantages before you get the approximate benefit of one advantage. You can read further on the effects of advantage in this Q&A.
$endgroup$
This makes one advantage significantly weaker and it becomes very difficult to reach enough advantages to compensate.
For demonstration purposes, let's take a standard d20 advantage roll minus a flat d20:

On average, this results in about +4 or higher as a benefit. This will require four stacked advantages before you get the approximate benefit of one advantage. You can read further on the effects of advantage in this Q&A.
edited 2 hours ago
answered 3 hours ago
David CoffronDavid Coffron
38.5k3133273
38.5k3133273
$begingroup$
As an alternative, Adding d4 for single, d6 for double, and d8 for triple works nicely I think. Adding the d4 is slightly worse than normal advantage, d6 is about the same and d8 is a little better. One thing to note is that this allows rolling more than 20 total but even with the d8 it is only ~2.5% of the time. Charts: anydice.com/program/14427
$endgroup$
– Captain Man
1 hour ago
1
$begingroup$
@CaptainMan that might be worth it's own answer if you can provide a solid reasoning that clues the OP in to why this system would be balanced. I'd have to playtest it to be sure
$endgroup$
– David Coffron
1 hour ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
As an alternative, Adding d4 for single, d6 for double, and d8 for triple works nicely I think. Adding the d4 is slightly worse than normal advantage, d6 is about the same and d8 is a little better. One thing to note is that this allows rolling more than 20 total but even with the d8 it is only ~2.5% of the time. Charts: anydice.com/program/14427
$endgroup$
– Captain Man
1 hour ago
1
$begingroup$
@CaptainMan that might be worth it's own answer if you can provide a solid reasoning that clues the OP in to why this system would be balanced. I'd have to playtest it to be sure
$endgroup$
– David Coffron
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
As an alternative, Adding d4 for single, d6 for double, and d8 for triple works nicely I think. Adding the d4 is slightly worse than normal advantage, d6 is about the same and d8 is a little better. One thing to note is that this allows rolling more than 20 total but even with the d8 it is only ~2.5% of the time. Charts: anydice.com/program/14427
$endgroup$
– Captain Man
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
As an alternative, Adding d4 for single, d6 for double, and d8 for triple works nicely I think. Adding the d4 is slightly worse than normal advantage, d6 is about the same and d8 is a little better. One thing to note is that this allows rolling more than 20 total but even with the d8 it is only ~2.5% of the time. Charts: anydice.com/program/14427
$endgroup$
– Captain Man
1 hour ago
1
1
$begingroup$
@CaptainMan that might be worth it's own answer if you can provide a solid reasoning that clues the OP in to why this system would be balanced. I'd have to playtest it to be sure
$endgroup$
– David Coffron
1 hour ago
$begingroup$
@CaptainMan that might be worth it's own answer if you can provide a solid reasoning that clues the OP in to why this system would be balanced. I'd have to playtest it to be sure
$endgroup$
– David Coffron
1 hour ago
add a comment |
Dnial Khastalani is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Dnial Khastalani is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Dnial Khastalani is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Dnial Khastalani is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Thanks for contributing an answer to Role-playing Games Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2frpg.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f144093%2fwould-this-house-rule-that-treats-advantage-as-a-1-to-the-roll-instead-and-dis%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
$begingroup$
Welcome! You can take the tour as an introduction to the site and check the help center for further guidance. Good luck and happy gaming!
$endgroup$
– Sdjz
4 hours ago
$begingroup$
This Q&A is related. Suggest you read up on that and perhaps revise your question.
$endgroup$
– KorvinStarmast
2 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@KorvinStarmast OP note that at this point there is no way for you to significantly revise the question without invalidating the answers. If it inspires you to a significantly new question, you are welcome to ask it as a new question.
$endgroup$
– Rubiksmoose
2 hours ago
1
$begingroup$
@SnoringFrog Please see this meta for why your comment was removed. Thanks!
$endgroup$
– doppelgreener♦
1 hour ago
1
$begingroup$
My instinct is that triple/quad/etc advantage would actually be a bigger deal in D&D than it usually is in Open Legend. Sure you dont have exploding dice, but advantage on a d20 is better than advantage on a smaller die.
$endgroup$
– Tal
17 mins ago