I noticed recently that there is no limit to the number of times this feat can be used. While it is "must take the second roll" instead of "choose which die you want to use", it seems like a lower key version of Divination Wizard's gimmick with no speed limit. Trying to get opinions from other DMs about whether this is justifiable to nerf.
In my opinion it’s not really overpowered as yes while it does have no limit to its use it only works on natural ones and it cost a reaction to use it also then seals off the halflings own lucky feature until the end of there next turn and it’s also a feat as well so if the halfling is taking this then their not taking another good feat like Lucky or Alert.
I've often seen people say it's OP but it's always people who would never play a Halfling because they just aren't that good. Halfling Lucky is solid but it seems way better than it really is because we're all conditioned to get excited whenever we see a Nat-1 or Nat-20 roll, so being able to negate that excitement seems overpowered but really it's just emotions talking and not logic.
Halfling luck is generally less powerful than the regular lucky feat. A typically adventuring day probably features fewer than forty d20 rolls, and fewer than twenty d20 rolls that you really care strongly about whether you fail, so on average it's giving you fewer than 2 rerolls per day and fewer than 1 important reroll per day.
I noticed recently that there is no limit to the number of times this feat can be used. While it is "must take the second roll" instead of "choose which die you want to use", it seems like a lower key version of Divination Wizard's gimmick with no speed limit. Trying to get opinions from other DMs about whether this is justifiable to nerf.
I don't think the feat Bountiful Luck is overpowered, despite not being limited by daily usage, it still includes limitations such as seeing the target, being within range, rolling a nat 1, rreroll meaning no guaranteed success and the fact that it uses your reaction means it must still be available to you and is usable at best 1/round and prevent you from using your Lucky trait until the end of your next turn. Considering 5E combats usually last between 3-7 rounds and that the feat is situational, it's not guaranteed to come up every round and have success but will takes up your reaction and Lucky trait usage until your next turn.
Yes, I was thinking: "well, it's fine if Halfling can use their Luck, but being able to spread the luck around to the whole party might be too much. I think what I will go with is that it can't be used every single round; that the PC would have to skip one round at least before using it again. That feels like a fair balance.
Given the context and your last statement I assume you are talking about the bountiful luck feat not the halfling's lucky racial feature.
Bountiful luck is a underpowered compared to other feats at least unless your table plays with critical fumbles as a homebrew (which by the way is a bad idea).
The biggest problems are it uses your reaction and there is no guarantee of success. By using bountiful luck you can't cast shield or counterspell later in the round. On a AoE attack that hits you and another party member who gets a nat 1 most of the time you will want to cast absorb elements rather than use bountiful luck. Melee fighters need there reaction to preventer the enemy melees from running straight the wizard / healer with no risk of an op attack.
Bountiful luck is either chosen purely for flavor reasons or by those that think it is more powerful than it is
I would be surprised if it is worth using this even once a day on average making lucky a far better feat. Elven accuracy would be a much more powerful feat even if it didn't give you an ASI.
Strangely by adding your restriction you might make the party stronger as instead of wasting their reaction on turning a nat 1 into a nat 10 that was still a fail they might be able to do something really useful like counterspell a fireball or (at higher levels) a power word kill on the wizard who is down to 90 HP.
Given the context and your last statement I assume you are talking about the bountiful luck feat not the halfling's lucky racial feature.
Bountiful luck is a underpowered compared to other feats at least unless your table plays with critical fumbles as a homebrew (which by the way is a bad idea).
The biggest problems are it uses your reaction and there is no guarantee of success. By using bountiful luck you can't cast shield or counterspell later in the round. On a AoE attack that hits you and another party member who gets a nat 1 most of the time you will want to cast absorb elements rather than use bountiful luck. Melee fighters need there reaction to preventer the enemy melees from running straight the wizard / healer with no risk of an op attack.
Bountiful luck is either chosen purely for flavor reasons or by those that think it is more powerful than it is
I would be surprised if it is worth using this even once a day on average making lucky a far better feat. Elven accuracy would be a much more powerful feat even if it didn't give you an ASI.
Strangely by adding your restriction you might make the party stronger as instead of wasting their reaction on turning a nat 1 into a nat 10 that was still a fail they might be able to do something really useful like counterspell a fireball or (at higher levels) a power word kill on the wizard who is down to 90 HP.
That might indeed be true...if this PC had spells like Counterspell or Shield. They do not, and generally have nothing useful to do within their reaction anyway, even at higher levels less they take War Caster.
I played a halfling in a campaign through level 13, and it rarely came up. There were actually two of us in the party, and we had to remind each other to use it. And even with a re-roll, that second roll failed quite a few times as well. So, no. Not OP.
I chose to play a halfling forge cleric that had bountiful luck. It was rarely used. Mostly because it prevented my lucky trait from being used until the end of the next turn as a consequence. I decided to only use it in clutch moments and honestly, I can't remember a single one so they weren't that clutch. I don't even think it was worth it really. We had a divination wizard that always got more mileage out of their portents than I ever got out of my feat.
Because it's situational, if i played a halfling haracter with the Bountiful Luck feat, i would use it whenever the occasion arise unless i needed my reaction precisely for something else to do in the round, such as the Ready action.
Because it's situational, if i played a halfling haracter with the Bountiful Luck feat, i would use it whenever the occasion arise unless i needed my reaction precisely for something else to do in the round, such as the Ready action.
I would agree with this in most situations. My cleric was a melee cleric, so the math just seemed to feel like it supported keeping my own luck. Attacks, opportunity attacks, and checks in combat were common for me every round.
To me, it seems this feat has more value outside of combat than in it.
I would agree with this in most situations. My cleric was a melee cleric, so the math just seemed to feel like it supported keeping my own luck. Attacks, opportunity attacks, and checks in combat were common for me every round.
To me, it seems this feat has more value outside of combat than in it.
It's a situational party support the only downside is it cost a reaction and the use of another situational trait in Lucky, which may not necessarily come up before the end of your next turn if don't roll a 1 on the d20 for an attack roll, ability check, or saving throw before then, or use a reaction at all.
I agree outside of combat it's significantly more useful on an ability check or saving throw, which include Initiative, concentration check and death saving throw as well.
I would agree with this in most situations. My cleric was a melee cleric, so the math just seemed to feel like it supported keeping my own luck. Attacks, opportunity attacks, and checks in combat were common for me every round.
To me, it seems this feat has more value outside of combat than in it.
It's a situational party support the only downside is it cost a reaction and the use of another situational trait in Lucky, which may not necessarily come up before the end of your next turn if don't roll a 1 on the d20 for an attack roll, ability check, or saving throw before then, or use a reaction at all.
I agree outside of combat it's significantly more useful on an ability check or saving throw, which include Initiative, concentration check and death saving throw as well.
You're probably right. It didn't feel that way when I was playing it though and opportunity attacks happened far more often than nat 1s. BGDiA had plenty of melee monsters and we had squishy casters in the rear. The only way to stop them from getting to the caster when no one had Sentinel was to kill them before they arrived.
Thanks i can understand your POV better now. My personal experience as player or DM differs a bit since provoking Opportunity Attacks is somewhat relatively rare, both from PC and monsters or NPC. When creatures get into melee distance, they usually stay put and rarely leave without taking the Dodge action. But i don't have compiled data to go as far as saying rolling a nat 1 on attack roll, ability check or saving throw occur more than Opportunity Attacks in general, but i'd say as a character with the Bountiful Luck feat i'd probably get more opportunity to affect nat 1s D20s from all my teamates than to make Opportunity Attacks.
It sounds like the general consensus then is that Bountiful Luck is better used by a non-melee PC who also does not have Reaction spells, such as Counterspell. Also, that it is more useful for OoCombat ability checks and saves since the clause preventing the possessor of the feat almost never kicks in when you're not in combat anyway. Great. Thanks everyone.
Thanks i can understand your POV better now. My personal experience as player or DM differs a bit since provoking Opportunity Attacks is somewhat relatively rare, both from PC and monsters or NPC. When creatures get into melee distance, they usually stay put and rarely leave without taking the Dodge action. But i don't have compiled data to go as far as saying rolling a nat 1 on attack roll, ability check or saving throw occur more than Opportunity Attacks in general, but i'd say as a character with the Bountiful Luck feat i'd probably get more opportunity to affect nat 1s D20s from all my teamates than to make Opportunity Attacks.
Ah, very nice. I couldn't speak to why my DM did not choose this route as we no longer game together, but it does sound like that would be the more tactically sound option for a baddie to take and after thinking about it some, is probably the way monsters should act. I know that if I, as a player, wanted to move out of melee, I would take the dodge action with my PC. I can't think of a reason why a monster wouldn't aside from being an unskilled fighter like a common mugger or something.
I agree with you that if everything is operating as it probably should, Bountiful Luck has more value and should be used whenever the chance arises.
It sounds like the general consensus then is that Bountiful Luck is better used by a non-melee PC who also does not have Reaction spells, such as Counterspell. Also, that it is more useful for OoCombat ability checks and saves since the clause preventing the possessor of the feat almost never kicks in when you're not in combat anyway. Great. Thanks everyone.
Yeah if you consistently have a use for your reaction such as spells, feature or feat then Bountiful Luck will put you in a though spot more often than not, having to take tactical decisions to take or pass.
I noticed recently that there is no limit to the number of times this feat can be used. While it is "must take the second roll" instead of "choose which die you want to use", it seems like a lower key version of Divination Wizard's gimmick with no speed limit. Trying to get opinions from other DMs about whether this is justifiable to nerf.
In my opinion it’s not really overpowered as yes while it does have no limit to its use it only works on natural ones and it cost a reaction to use it also then seals off the halflings own lucky feature until the end of there next turn and it’s also a feat as well so if the halfling is taking this then their not taking another good feat like Lucky or Alert.
I've often seen people say it's OP but it's always people who would never play a Halfling because they just aren't that good. Halfling Lucky is solid but it seems way better than it really is because we're all conditioned to get excited whenever we see a Nat-1 or Nat-20 roll, so being able to negate that excitement seems overpowered but really it's just emotions talking and not logic.
Halfling luck is generally less powerful than the regular lucky feat. A typically adventuring day probably features fewer than forty d20 rolls, and fewer than twenty d20 rolls that you really care strongly about whether you fail, so on average it's giving you fewer than 2 rerolls per day and fewer than 1 important reroll per day.
I don't think the feat Bountiful Luck is overpowered, despite not being limited by daily usage, it still includes limitations such as seeing the target, being within range, rolling a nat 1, rreroll meaning no guaranteed success and the fact that it uses your reaction means it must still be available to you and is usable at best 1/round and prevent you from using your Lucky trait until the end of your next turn. Considering 5E combats usually last between 3-7 rounds and that the feat is situational, it's not guaranteed to come up every round and have success but will takes up your reaction and Lucky trait usage until your next turn.
Yes, I was thinking: "well, it's fine if Halfling can use their Luck, but being able to spread the luck around to the whole party might be too much. I think what I will go with is that it can't be used every single round; that the PC would have to skip one round at least before using it again. That feels like a fair balance.
Given the context and your last statement I assume you are talking about the bountiful luck feat not the halfling's lucky racial feature.
Bountiful luck is a underpowered compared to other feats at least unless your table plays with critical fumbles as a homebrew (which by the way is a bad idea).
The biggest problems are it uses your reaction and there is no guarantee of success. By using bountiful luck you can't cast shield or counterspell later in the round. On a AoE attack that hits you and another party member who gets a nat 1 most of the time you will want to cast absorb elements rather than use bountiful luck. Melee fighters need there reaction to preventer the enemy melees from running straight the wizard / healer with no risk of an op attack.
Bountiful luck is either chosen purely for flavor reasons or by those that think it is more powerful than it is
I would be surprised if it is worth using this even once a day on average making lucky a far better feat. Elven accuracy would be a much more powerful feat even if it didn't give you an ASI.
Strangely by adding your restriction you might make the party stronger as instead of wasting their reaction on turning a nat 1 into a nat 10 that was still a fail they might be able to do something really useful like counterspell a fireball or (at higher levels) a power word kill on the wizard who is down to 90 HP.
That might indeed be true...if this PC had spells like Counterspell or Shield. They do not, and generally have nothing useful to do within their reaction anyway, even at higher levels less they take War Caster.
I played a halfling in a campaign through level 13, and it rarely came up. There were actually two of us in the party, and we had to remind each other to use it. And even with a re-roll, that second roll failed quite a few times as well. So, no. Not OP.
I chose to play a halfling forge cleric that had bountiful luck. It was rarely used. Mostly because it prevented my lucky trait from being used until the end of the next turn as a consequence. I decided to only use it in clutch moments and honestly, I can't remember a single one so they weren't that clutch. I don't even think it was worth it really. We had a divination wizard that always got more mileage out of their portents than I ever got out of my feat.
DM mostly, Player occasionally | Session 0 form | He/Him/They/Them
EXTENDED SIGNATURE!
Doctor/Published Scholar/Science and Healthcare Advocate/Critter/Trekkie/Gandalf with a Glock
Try DDB free: Free Rules (2024), premade PCs, adventures, one shots, encounters, SC, homebrew, more
Answers: physical books, purchases, and subbing.
Check out my life-changing
Because it's situational, if i played a halfling haracter with the Bountiful Luck feat, i would use it whenever the occasion arise unless i needed my reaction precisely for something else to do in the round, such as the Ready action.
I would agree with this in most situations. My cleric was a melee cleric, so the math just seemed to feel like it supported keeping my own luck. Attacks, opportunity attacks, and checks in combat were common for me every round.
To me, it seems this feat has more value outside of combat than in it.
DM mostly, Player occasionally | Session 0 form | He/Him/They/Them
EXTENDED SIGNATURE!
Doctor/Published Scholar/Science and Healthcare Advocate/Critter/Trekkie/Gandalf with a Glock
Try DDB free: Free Rules (2024), premade PCs, adventures, one shots, encounters, SC, homebrew, more
Answers: physical books, purchases, and subbing.
Check out my life-changing
It's a situational party support the only downside is it cost a reaction and the use of another situational trait in Lucky, which may not necessarily come up before the end of your next turn if don't roll a 1 on the d20 for an attack roll, ability check, or saving throw before then, or use a reaction at all.
I agree outside of combat it's significantly more useful on an ability check or saving throw, which include Initiative, concentration check and death saving throw as well.
You're probably right. It didn't feel that way when I was playing it though and opportunity attacks happened far more often than nat 1s. BGDiA had plenty of melee monsters and we had squishy casters in the rear. The only way to stop them from getting to the caster when no one had Sentinel was to kill them before they arrived.
DM mostly, Player occasionally | Session 0 form | He/Him/They/Them
EXTENDED SIGNATURE!
Doctor/Published Scholar/Science and Healthcare Advocate/Critter/Trekkie/Gandalf with a Glock
Try DDB free: Free Rules (2024), premade PCs, adventures, one shots, encounters, SC, homebrew, more
Answers: physical books, purchases, and subbing.
Check out my life-changing
Thanks i can understand your POV better now. My personal experience as player or DM differs a bit since provoking Opportunity Attacks is somewhat relatively rare, both from PC and monsters or NPC. When creatures get into melee distance, they usually stay put and rarely leave without taking the Dodge action. But i don't have compiled data to go as far as saying rolling a nat 1 on attack roll, ability check or saving throw occur more than Opportunity Attacks in general, but i'd say as a character with the Bountiful Luck feat i'd probably get more opportunity to affect nat 1s D20s from all my teamates than to make Opportunity Attacks.
It sounds like the general consensus then is that Bountiful Luck is better used by a non-melee PC who also does not have Reaction spells, such as Counterspell. Also, that it is more useful for OoCombat ability checks and saves since the clause preventing the possessor of the feat almost never kicks in when you're not in combat anyway. Great. Thanks everyone.
Ah, very nice. I couldn't speak to why my DM did not choose this route as we no longer game together, but it does sound like that would be the more tactically sound option for a baddie to take and after thinking about it some, is probably the way monsters should act. I know that if I, as a player, wanted to move out of melee, I would take the dodge action with my PC. I can't think of a reason why a monster wouldn't aside from being an unskilled fighter like a common mugger or something.
I agree with you that if everything is operating as it probably should, Bountiful Luck has more value and should be used whenever the chance arises.
DM mostly, Player occasionally | Session 0 form | He/Him/They/Them
EXTENDED SIGNATURE!
Doctor/Published Scholar/Science and Healthcare Advocate/Critter/Trekkie/Gandalf with a Glock
Try DDB free: Free Rules (2024), premade PCs, adventures, one shots, encounters, SC, homebrew, more
Answers: physical books, purchases, and subbing.
Check out my life-changing
Yeah if you consistently have a use for your reaction such as spells, feature or feat then Bountiful Luck will put you in a though spot more often than not, having to take tactical decisions to take or pass.
Hell yes! It gives halflings 1/40 chance to roll a natural 1
I believe it's more like 1/400