Just had a thought and was wondering other peeps opinions.
Is see a lot of people say advantage is equivalent to a +5...or pretty close at least. If anything I think +5 is quite a bit better. I think the Advantage is probably closer to a +3(maybe +4 if being generous) if anything. I assume most people get the +5 equivalent off the average of the two rolls. But in reality the average is the "same", but the min/max roll with a +5 is much higher. Meaning with advantage something’s are still undoable, but with the +5 they become...well doable, and some things then become unfailable. Would really have to put weight on the min/max bonus to figure out how much less the advantage is worth, but I wouldn't give it a +5 rating based off the average roll alone.
Edit: Must also put weight on the increased chance to crit as well, but attacks are only one of many reason to roll a dice.
Edit: Thinking +4 now, after being presuaded, but that's assuming melloreds information is correct. Don't think I could go higher do to sometimes advantage meaning nothing, if you can't roll high enough.
Edit: This includes skill checks and STs , not just attack rolls. Thus I don't hold rolling a 20, or not rolling a 1, as a huge of a bonus as if we were rolling attacks only.
Edit: I think the biggest thing people forget is that +5 increases your roll range, and advantage does not. This is the biggest reason I think it's not as good as a +5(OR it's exact average bonus) and lower it accordingly.
Edit: Believe my current rating, in thought atleast, is about +4.25 now.
Edit: Make that +4.5
IMO: advantage is +4.5.
it's only at the extremes that it's lower then 4.something. and it's never greater than +5.
mellored wrote:
The flat average of 2d20, take the highest, is 13.82 or +3.82. (4.71 standard deviation).
Edit: 3.33, since 10.5 is the average of 1d20.
But because of bounded accuracy, you are rarely going to reach an extreme (unless your talking about crits), and most of the rolls will fall between a 25% and 75% chance (+3.75), if not even closer to 50% (+5)
So it's between +3.75 and +5, (4.375 average) but with with bit more wieght in the middle.
Or roughly, 4.5
Though, it really depends on the spread. If your fight enemies with a large variation of stats, then it would go down.
mellored wrote:
HermanTheWize wrote:
mellored wrote:
IMO, there are some subtly elegant mechanics under the hood of Adv/Disad. Many of which are integral to, or synergistic with, Bounded Accuracy.
Reasons why I like Adv/Disad:
1) It doesn't actually change you maximum or minimum possible result. Only the likelihood of reaching either.
2) The "bonus" you are getting, statistically speaking, is on a sliding scale relative to your base chance of success.
3) It substantially increases/decreases the likelihood of getting a natural 1 or 20 as your result.
4) It cuts down on all the on-the-fly table math and nickle-and-dime bonuses/penalties, speeding up play.
5) Rolling two dice is fun!
ChrisCarlson wrote:
Rolling without advantage on the d20 is the equivalent of 10,5 on average.
Rolling with advantage on the d20 is the equivalent of 13,83 on average.
Strictly speaking, advantage is the equivalent of 13,83 - 10,5 = +3,33
The probability of hitting something that has a DC of 20 or above with a d20 with advantage, is 39/400 = 9,75%The probability of hitting something that has a DC of 2 with a d20 with advantage, is 399/400= 99,75%
The probability of hitting something that has a DC of 11 with a d20 with advantage is 300/400= 75%
The probability of hitting something that has a DC of 14 with a d20 with advantage is 241/400= 60,25%
The probability of hitting something that has a DC of 15 with a d20 with advantage is 214/400= 53,5%
The probability of hitting something that has a DC of 17 with a d20 with advantage is 144/400= 36%
The probability of hitting something that has a DC of 18 with a d20 with advantage is 111/400= 27,75%
The probability of hitting something that has a DC of 6 with a d20 with advantage, is 369/400= 92,25%
The probability of hitting something that has a DC of 20 or above with a d20+3 is 4/20= 20%
The probability of hitting something that has a DC of 2 with a d20+3 is 19/20= 95%
The probability of hitting something that has a DC of 11 with a d20+3 is 13/20= 65%
The probability of hitting something that has a DC of 17 with a d20+3 is 7/20= 35%
The probability of hitting something that has a DC of 18 with a d20+3 is 7/20= 30%
The probability of hitting something that has a DC of 20 or above with a d20+4 is 5/20= 25%
The probability of hitting something that has a DC of 2 with a d20+4 is 19/20= 95%
The probability of hitting something that has a DC of 11 with a d20+4 is 14/20= 70%
The probability of hitting something that has a DC of 14 with a d20+4 is 12/20= 60%
The probability of hitting something that has a DC of 15 with a d20+4 is 11/20= 55%
ChrisCarlson wrote:
Vahnyu wrote:
It ends up being slightly higher in practice. Basically, once you hit 8th level, you hit the point where the math is relatively consistent AC-wise. You have a +5 to hit from stat and a +3 from proficiency(+8). The default CR 8 monster has a 16 AC and when you go up to level 20, you'll get an additional +3 to hit and the CR 20 monster will get an additional +3 to AC.
So, 8 vs 16 means you need to roll an 8, or a 65% to-hit chance. That's not an accident - 65% is the sweet spot mathematically where most players feel like they have a good chance to accomplish something, but it won't be automatic. Multiple to-hit rolls kick that up to nearly 88%, so anyone with Extra Attack will almost always accomplish something in a round.
Let's look at the numbers for a few common situations:
65% turns into 88%(+23%) - typical 20 stat guy swinging at someone
40% turns into 64%(+24%) - typical 20 stat guy swinging at someone with Great Weapon Master
75% turns into 94%(+19%) - crossbow guy with archery style
50% turns into 75%(+25%) - crossbow guy with archery style using Sharpshooter
55% turns into 80%(+25%) - tough monster with +2 AC more than expected with no unusual bonuses to hit.
30% turns into 51%(+21%) - tough monster with +2 AC more than expected with no unusual bonuses to hit and doing the -5/+10 feat anyway.
Now note two things:
I'm not including crits. For all the no -5/+10 options, it basically amounts to being an extra half an attack to 2/3rds of an attack on a hit. Let's call it +2% to keep it simple. For the +10 damage options, it ends up being about a 4th of a hit(1d10+15 = 20.5 vs 5.5) or +1% to keep it simple.
That then turns the numbers into +25%, +25%, +21%, +26%, +27% and 22%. i.e. the common situations are essentially a +5 to hit. The outliers are a little bit above a +4 and they represent a situation where the player is potentially ignoring the optimal options - if you're consistently hitting 75% of the time before advantage, you likely ought to be transforming some of that to-hit into extra damage. If you only have a 30% chance to-hit, a 51% vs 80% and you have some additional bonuses to damage baked into there somehow, it might be better to ignore the -5/+10 feat(though not if you don't)
Vahnyu wrote:
HermanTheWize wrote:
HermanTheWize wrote:
Contrarianism: Blight of the modern interweb era.
I'm surprised you didn't disagree with my reason #5 for my liking the mechanic. Seems a much lower hanging fruit...
As for my #4. I'm happy to be in the same camp as the devs, who have stated it as one of the reasons it became popular among playtesters. My experience with it concurs with that analysis. I'm also truly sorry the complexity of rolling two dice has stymied you. I hope you can overcome that hurdle and figure out a way to enjoy Adv/Disad for all it provides at the table (assuming you even play 5e).
MwaOrc brings up a valid point about a 'sweet spot'
If you need an 8 to hit, up to needing a 14 to hit, advantage is better than a +4.5 to hit
From 7 to 15, it is better than a +4 to hit.
HermanTheWize wrote:
Coredump00 wrote:
Archon007 wrote:
ChrisCarlson wrote:
Kalani wrote:
HermanTheWize wrote:
mellored wrote:
Due to lengthy discussions about this very topic in several other threads, I'm just going to say "I agree with those people who are correct. You know who you are."
Questions that the Opening poster must answer before any kind of comparison can be done.
How likely is each ac or DC value to appear in your game?
Most of us here believe that needing at least a 1,2,3,4,5 or a 16,17,18,19,20 to succeed is very unlikely.
Most rolls need to at least a number between 6 and 15 to succeed. As such we take the average case to be around 4.5. For attack rolls since advantage also generally increases your chance to crit we round up and estimate a +5 bonus. This estimate is only good for the specified domain of needed anywhere from at least a 6 to a 15 to hit.
Outside that domain things change a lot. Luckily for us, we rarely need to roll anything outside that range for success.
FrogReaver wrote:
Just to expand it...
5-17 (middle 13)
(5 + (3.2+3.75+4.25+4.555+4.8+4.95)*2) / 13 =
4.3
4-18 (middle 15)
(5 + (2.55+3.2+3.75+4.25+4.555+4.8+4.95)*2) / 15 =
4.07
3-19 (middle 17)
(5 + (1.8+2.55+3.2+3.75+4.25+4.555+4.8+4.95)*2) / 17 =
3.8
2-20 (middle 19)
(5+(0.95+1.8+2.55+3.2+3.75+4.25+4.555+4.8+4.95)*2) / 19 =
3.5
And 1-20 is
3.33
G$% D@#$@it....I think I agree with MelloRed now. I think the rolling 20 bonus/ not rolling 1 for attack rolls bonus is about equaly weight as the DCs ranging from 1-6, 16+......
You win this day MelloRed.....you and you partner FrogReaver.
My current belief is approxiamtly advantage is worth +4.5...
Mellored ---> 
<------FrogReaver
ChrisCarlson wrote:
Going to Graph shows the sweet spot where one becomes better than the other. Compare that with the number you need to roll and you've your answer. But it's definitely a case by case basis. Also dice tend not to be perfect as to save plastic.
ChrisCarlson wrote:
...what's the latin emoticon for 
?
Vahnyu wrote:
This one deserves it's own post for emphasis...
Vahnyu wrote:
People are rolling both dice together, right? How long can it possibly take to glance down and recognize which is higher?
Personally, I roll both d20's (when applicable) AND my damage dice all in one go.
You may have just blown his mind with that...
HermanTheWize wrote:
Kayal wrote:
Psikerlord wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
Kayal wrote:
Kayal wrote:
Please, pardon the paraphrasing and parsing of passages. In order to respond to specific concepts, I lumped similiar ideas together.
FrogReaver wrote:
Hmmm, a magic weapon that, adds +3 to attack, once per attack roll rerolls 1s, and increases the critical threat range from 20 to 19-20... That would perhaps be the better equivalent of advantage?
ChrisCarlson wrote:
FallingIcicle wrote:
ChrisCarlson wrote:
FrogReaver wrote:
Psikerlord wrote: