0

RAW, advantages and disadvantages cancel each others out, always. Here I am interested in the case, where these two (found at PHB - Combat - Unseen Attackers and Targets) cancel each others out:

When you Attack a target that you can’t see, you have disadvantage on the Attack roll.

When a creature can’t see you, you have advantage on Attack rolls against it.

I just don't like how combining these work out. I mean, take an ax and go chopping some incapacitated or prone wood while blindfolded, and see how it goes. And then there are the "abuses" of this, like turning IMHO big disadvantages (fluff-wise, like 600' long bow shot) into a straight roll by creating an area of Darkness, which you can then move behind/into between looking at the enemy and actually taking the attack action. But this isn't the question, but just for the context, explaining why I am asking the following question:

On an upcoming campaign, I am planning to have the house-rule: If you don't see the target you are attacking, you will have disadvantage.

What are the balance and game play implications of this house rule? Will it break something, or have some nasty unintended consequences?

WakiNadiVellir
  • 12,152
  • 2
  • 40
  • 96

1 Answers1

0

What are the balance and game play implications of this house rule?

That this one, and only this one, source of disadvantage is special in that it cannot be countered by advantage.

So this is special.

It’s more special than, say, trying to hit someone while dangling by one hand from the end of a rope. Or while surfing. Or while prone. Or while launching yourself in a triple forward somersault from a swinging chandelier while your opponent’s familiar tries to rip your ears off after just learning that your mother died.

I don't know why, but you do you.

Will it break something, ...

Nope.

or have some nasty unintended consequences?

Absolutely.

Of course, I can’t tell you what they are because they are unforeseen as well as unintended.

Look. The advantage and disadvantage rules are deliberately simple to allow you to play the game quickly and easily. If you have one source of advantage you stop looking for more and likewise for disadvantage. Playability beats simulation. If you don’t like that, fine. But is there some balancing form of super-advantage to match this?

Rubiksmoose
  • 94,696
  • 21
  • 483
  • 580
Dale M
  • 210,673
  • 42
  • 528
  • 889
  • If you want to give examples of different situations to frame challenge the question, please give complete examples, similar to my "cancel your own disadvantage by using magical darkness to cover the target". – WakiNadiVellir Aug 30 '20 at 13:12
  • As to keeping things simple. While it is an additional rule, it makes things very simple: If you don't see the target, you don't need to consider if you have some source of advantage on your attack to cancel out that disadvantage. – WakiNadiVellir Aug 30 '20 at 13:13
  • As for having "super advantage" as a balancing thing, I just don't see the need. If you don't see the target, you don't see the target, and that's that. But now that you mention it, just as an example, I would probably agree to have Keen Mind feat to allow shooting from memory, including avoiding disadvantage when shooting at a target you have seen, who has not moved. – WakiNadiVellir Aug 30 '20 at 13:25
  • 1
    Explanation of the downvote: Considering the details in some of the answers is the linked duplicate (which actually isn't quite a duplicate, but good enough for me), which actually go into details of the potential consequences, I think this answer isn't "useful" in a way that answers in this site are expected to be. – WakiNadiVellir Aug 30 '20 at 13:35