Talk:Stacking Advantage (5e Variant Rule)

From D&D Wiki

Jump to: navigation, search

I thought the Advantage mechanic was introduced to avoid "shopping lists" of bonus and penalty modifiers in the first place. Also, (and I admit I may be wrong here) adding extra advantage dice becomes exponentially better for the player (including additional chances at a critical) compared to the linear increase that old-style bonuses grant. Marasmusine (talk) 01:35, 26 September 2014 (MDT)

Absolutely! That's why the explanation was provided. If you like that the system counteracts the shopping lists and levels the game a bit, go with the original system. If you specifically like the shopping lists of interacting roll modifiers and want something more than simple roll result adjustments, and like the concept of a system that accounts for advantage and disadvantage via dice pool rather than arbitrary bonuses, this system is for you. In other words, if you like a game with lots and lots of finicky complex minutiae, like me, this is for you. And yes, more dice do provide exponentially better results. This is why DMs would need to find increasingly ridiculous ways of advantaging the NPCs against the PCs, and disadvantaging the PCs to cut the edge off of all their intentionally planned advantages they carry around with them. -- 15:38, 26 September 2014 (MDT)
Actually, come to think of it, I put this in the wrong category. Because it changes some of the focus in combat tactics and encounter design, as well as trying to account for each instance of advantage mechanically, it's really more transformative. -- 12:43, 27 September 2014 (MDT)

These "stacking bonus" entries are based on discussions around my table as we play the game, and are updated as we find new ways to deal with issues we have with the core rules. True to that nature, I have included a summarized quote of my players' (And somewhat my) response to the default rule prior to explaining the variant. At my table, we use variant 2. Sadly, this is how I discovered that both stacking bonus rules can combine to destabilize the game completely, and usually at random. I am still looking for a halfway that accounts for all instances of advantage and proficiency applying to every roll.-- 12:47, 30 September 2014 (MDT)

I despise Bruenor, or any example of a specific character. Examples should be abstract, so as to be universally applicable. The change to the examples section looks fine by me, and I'll update the other stacking bonuses rule to have the same format. I will not complain about the removal of the "Hot/Mild" flavoring, as the new version (though less interesting) is more pragmatic.--Kydo (talk) 17:55, 2 October 2014 (MDT)

Ahah, I only picked Bruenor because he's the subject of fifth edition's character creation example. I know nothing about him, but I feel examples do well when random names are thrown in because it helps tie the abstract concept to the real world (which is the entire purpose of an example). I won't mind if you change it back to a nameless character, I just saw it as an improvement. —Proton[talk] 18:55, 2 October 2014 (MDT)
It is, that's why it pains me so! XD --Kydo (talk) 23:37, 19 October 2014 (MDT)

Analytical solution for these probability functions. You might find this useful...

Home of user-generated,
homebrew pages!