I don't know how popular of an opinion that is, but I prefer it when systems only include one, single method of modifying dice rolls that always applies. e.g. if it's bonuses and penalties to the roll, then this is the only method used in the game. If it's extra-dice-pick-higest, then only that. I dislike it when sometimes the roll is modified, sometimes the target number changes, sometimes extra dice, sometimes different dice, etc. It rustles my jimmies. Your thoughts?
Sorry to hear that you're too retarded to handle multiple distinct concepts.
>>96941734It's certainly easier to design around and it's helpful when there's an underlying unified logic to these things. Bad stuff? give a penalty. Good stuff? Give a bonus. Increase relative to the badness or goodness or what is going on. Doesn't require any rulebook consultation.Adding other fiddly ways to use and adjust the dice is usually done as an attempt to evoke a different feel outside of a flat increased chance to succeed or fail. Advantage is meant to be that the odds are somewhat more in your favor, but not guaranteed. I don't think it works especially well, but the concept of "roll twice and take the higher" sounds better than "you get +2 to try this."
>>96941734I personally like a more nuanced control over probabilities as a DM, and it can serve different purposes. So for example in DnD, I use both advantages and DC reductions if my players roleplay well, depending on what they say.Sure, I allow just doing a plain roll against my imagined DC if the player just wants to say "I try to persuade him", but if the player roleplays, depending on how eloquent they are with their words, I give them Advantage/Disadvantage, or if the content of their words, regardless of eloquence, resonates with the mindset of the NPC, I grant them flat DC reductions too.They are both different types of rewards/punishments, and change probabilities differently. And besides that, one is Overt, which allows the player to judge how well they spoke and thus their actual ability at the task, while the other is covert, more about how the NPC thinks.I wouldn't want to see these two methods be replaced with one.For the probabilities, think of it this way, multiple rolls are hard to grant relatively. If a player is supposed to get a "good" bonus, and another is supposed to get a "slightly" better bonus, I can't do that with multiple roles. Similarly, with modifiers, I can't actually increase or decrease the chances of critical faliures or successes. They're two, different, and very useful effects.
>>96942219>I don't think it works especially wellThen you haven't considered it well. Advantage boosts the chance of a critical success from 5% to 9.75% and reduced the chance of a critical faliure to a mere 0.25%. They still collectively add up to 10% for all the opposite side pairs that add to 21, but the odds are shifted vastly for each opposite pair on the die towards the higher side, more so for the most extreme and important ones like 20 and 1. Advantage is a big bonus to your chances of not absolutely fumbling even if the boost to average is not that significant (13.825).They are very different and very significant effects.
>>96941734You're retarded and autistic. Moving on.
