Hi everyone, can a 1 be changed to a 3 using Focused Aim to avoid rolling on the fumble tables? Or does it automatically crit fail? Are there rules on this?
Yep, the die roll is still a 1, which is still a miss no matter what modifiers might get applied.
However, "crit fail" and "fumble tables" are both house rules. RAW, all a 1 does is guarantee a miss.
Also, one thing to consider with fumble tables is that if you use them for every attack in a turn then as a character levels up and gets better, gaining more attacks then their chances of "fumbling" every turn also go up. Many folks don't really think that makes sense - so if your table does use this rule then you might want to see if they will limit it to just the first attack roll of the turn.
e.g. A level 1 fighter has a 5% chance of fumbling in a turn, if every attack roll counts for fumbles then a level 20 fighter has an 18.5% chance of fumbling every turn (this goes up to 33% on a turn when they action surge). Basically, about 1 turn out of every 5, a level 20 fighter will fumble an attack while the lowly level 1 will do it about once every 20 rounds. In addition, a level 20 fighter could easily fumble more than once in a turn - really makes the high level characters with lots of attacks (like monks also - who could have 4 attacks/rd at level 5 with flurry of blows) look pretty incompetent.
I read Focus Aim 's attack roll increase as a bonus to it, which would not help when rolling a natural 1 critical miss automatic rule, just like Precision Attack doesn't. The only thing that lets you ignore a natural 1 result is when you're able to reroll and use new roll instead.
Focus Aim: When you miss with an attack roll, you can spend 1 to 3 ki points to increase your attack roll by 2 for each of these ki points you spend, potentially turning the miss into a hit.
It basically comes down to a "d20 roll" not being the same thing as the "attack roll" (or any other kind of save/check). The d20 roll is added to the [whatever], but only the [whatever] results are modified, the "d20 roll" is never modified. So a nat 1 is always a nat 1 no matter how many bonuses or "increases" are added to the result.
That being said, there are examples of a specific feature rule modifying the general rule that a 1 on an attack roll misses and a 20 on an attack roll hits.
That being said, there are examples of a specific feature rule modifying the general rule that a 1 on an attack roll misses and a 20 on an attack roll hits.
Are there? There are certainly rules that allow you to re-roll a failed attack roll, or in the case of a Halfling you can re-roll 1's so your chances of getting an unmodifiable natural 1 are a lot lower, but I'm not aware of anything that lets you simply ignore it?
We've got features like Reliable Talent (Rogue) and Silver Tongue (College of Eloquence) that lets us turn anything less than a 10 into a 10, but this only applies to skill checks which don't suffer natural 1's as standard anyway. Not sure I'm aware of anything that does anything similar for attacks?
A natural 20 on an attack roll is not a guaranteed hit in the case of mirror image, silvery barbs, and a warlock's armor of hexes, to list three examples.
Auto hit or miss outcome are not canceled by addition/reduction or bonus/penalty, usually only effects causing opposite outcome or reroll do. Retargeting simply transfer the outcome onto someone or something else.
I might be wrong. I often am. Let's look for a way the general rule for rolling a 1 on an attack roll beats the specific focused aim rule. Here's my thinking:
If focused aim directly contradicts the general rule, then the monk feature wins because specific > general.
If focused aim does not directly contradict the general rule, then we need to figure out a way to apply both situations simultaneously. I am struggling to think of any way to apply focused aim in a way that does not use ki points to turn a 1 into something higher than a 1.
I suppose the third option would be to say that the general rule pre-emptively disqualifies focused aim before it can take effect. But that sure sounds like we are saying that the general rule contradicts the specific rule, which brings us back to the first point.
Focused Aim is a modifier, but a natural 1 "misses regardless of any modifiers or the target's AC".
I mean, technically you can still use Focused Aim if you want to, nothing prevents this, it just won't do anything. However another way of looking at it is that the rule for natural 1's is more specific in this case, because it applies to 1 in 20 rolls, whereas Focused Aim applies to 18 in 20 (as you don't need it on a natural 20).
Right, but that text comes from a general rule. Just because a general rule says a modifier cannot change it, a specific rule can still do exactly that because a specific rule beats a general rule when they contradict each other :) For instance, if you rolled a natural 20 attack against a hexblade warlock, and they used the armor of hexes feature to successfully turn the hit into a miss, would you say, "Sorry mate, natural 20 wins,"?
Right, but that text comes from a general rule. Just because a general rule says a modifier cannot change it, a specific rule can still do exactly that because a specific rule beats a general rule when they contradict each other :) For instance, if you rolled a natural 20 attack against a hexblade warlock, and they used the armor of hexes feature to successfully turn the hit into a miss, would you say, "Sorry mate, natural 20 wins,"?
That's not how specific beats general works; if you applied that logic then natural 1's would be impossible because literally any rule that adds any modifier would be more "specific" because it's telling you to add something onto of the base ("general") roll.
Specific beats general would mean that if a rule states that something different happens when you roll a 1, then you use that rule instead. An ability that lets you re-roll 1's for example would apply, because instead of the 1 being a failure, it's now a re-roll, though this usually also state "you must use the second result" so if you roll another 1, that's the second result, which is a natural 1 as normal and therefore misses no matter what.
Right, but that text comes from a general rule. Just because a general rule says a modifier cannot change it, a specific rule can still do exactly that because a specific rule beats a general rule when they contradict each other :) For instance, if you rolled a natural 20 attack against a hexblade warlock, and they used the armor of hexes feature to successfully turn the hit into a miss, would you say, "Sorry mate, natural 20 wins,"?
That's not how specific beats general works; if you applied that logic then natural 1's would be impossible because literally any rule that adds any modifier would be more "specific" because it's telling you to add something onto of the base ("general") roll.
(my emphasis)
This is correct. Any specific rule that contradicts this general rule would apply. But there are very few specific rules that do this. The lucky feat and halfling luck were two examples listed earlier. I propose that focused aim is another example that falls into this category.
I'm not trying to put words in your mouth, but to go back to my earlier post, you appear to be saying that these two rules do not directly contradict each other and therefore my second bullet point would apply. If the two rules do not contradict each other, then we must find a way to apply both the rules to the situation. How do we do that and still end up with the attack roll being a 1 at the end?
EDIT: While I stand behind the logic in this statement, my overall premise is incorrect for reasons I explain below.
Hi everyone, can a 1 be changed to a 3 using Focused Aim to avoid rolling on the fumble tables? Or does it automatically crit fail? Are there rules on this?
From the combat section in PHB or the Basic Rules:
Ruling as a DM I'd counted it as a failure with no abilities allowing modifications.
Thanks for the quick reply 👍
Yep, the die roll is still a 1, which is still a miss no matter what modifiers might get applied.
However, "crit fail" and "fumble tables" are both house rules. RAW, all a 1 does is guarantee a miss.
Also, one thing to consider with fumble tables is that if you use them for every attack in a turn then as a character levels up and gets better, gaining more attacks then their chances of "fumbling" every turn also go up. Many folks don't really think that makes sense - so if your table does use this rule then you might want to see if they will limit it to just the first attack roll of the turn.
e.g. A level 1 fighter has a 5% chance of fumbling in a turn, if every attack roll counts for fumbles then a level 20 fighter has an 18.5% chance of fumbling every turn (this goes up to 33% on a turn when they action surge). Basically, about 1 turn out of every 5, a level 20 fighter will fumble an attack while the lowly level 1 will do it about once every 20 rounds. In addition, a level 20 fighter could easily fumble more than once in a turn - really makes the high level characters with lots of attacks (like monks also - who could have 4 attacks/rd at level 5 with flurry of blows) look pretty incompetent.
That seems like a really strange ruling tbh considering features like Bountiful Luck and Lucky for Halflings.
But this feature doesn't read like it's a modifier but rather says it increases the roll so I think I'd let it work on a Nat 1 too.
What you said about crit fails/fumbles is spot on though.
All really valid points, thanks everyone.
I read Focus Aim 's attack roll increase as a bonus to it, which would not help when rolling a natural 1 critical miss automatic rule, just like Precision Attack doesn't. The only thing that lets you ignore a natural 1 result is when you're able to reroll and use new roll instead.
It basically comes down to a "d20 roll" not being the same thing as the "attack roll" (or any other kind of save/check). The d20 roll is added to the [whatever], but only the [whatever] results are modified, the "d20 roll" is never modified. So a nat 1 is always a nat 1 no matter how many bonuses or "increases" are added to the result.
That being said, there are examples of a specific feature rule modifying the general rule that a 1 on an attack roll misses and a 20 on an attack roll hits.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
Are there? There are certainly rules that allow you to re-roll a failed attack roll, or in the case of a Halfling you can re-roll 1's so your chances of getting an unmodifiable natural 1 are a lot lower, but I'm not aware of anything that lets you simply ignore it?
We've got features like Reliable Talent (Rogue) and Silver Tongue (College of Eloquence) that lets us turn anything less than a 10 into a 10, but this only applies to skill checks which don't suffer natural 1's as standard anyway. Not sure I'm aware of anything that does anything similar for attacks?
Characters: Bullette, Chortle, Dracarys Noir, Edward Merryspell, Habard Ashery, Legion, Peregrine
My Homebrew: Feats | Items | Monsters | Spells | Subclasses | Races
Guides: Creating Sub-Races Using Trait Options
WIP (feedback needed): Blood Mage, Chromatic Sorcerers, Summoner, Trickster Domain, Unlucky, Way of the Daoist (Drunken Master), Weapon Smith
Please don't reply to my posts unless you've read what they actually say.
A natural 20 on an attack roll is not a guaranteed hit in the case of mirror image, silvery barbs, and a warlock's armor of hexes, to list three examples.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
A natural 20 will automatically hit its target, wether its you or a duplicate.
...unless a specific rule says otherwise, which is how this tangent ties into the OP's question.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
Auto hit or miss outcome are not canceled by addition/reduction or bonus/penalty, usually only effects causing opposite outcome or reroll do. Retargeting simply transfer the outcome onto someone or something else.
I might be wrong. I often am. Let's look for a way the general rule for rolling a 1 on an attack roll beats the specific focused aim rule. Here's my thinking:
"Not all those who wander are lost"
Focused Aim is a modifier, but a natural 1 "misses regardless of any modifiers or the target's AC".
I mean, technically you can still use Focused Aim if you want to, nothing prevents this, it just won't do anything. However another way of looking at it is that the rule for natural 1's is more specific in this case, because it applies to 1 in 20 rolls, whereas Focused Aim applies to 18 in 20 (as you don't need it on a natural 20).
Characters: Bullette, Chortle, Dracarys Noir, Edward Merryspell, Habard Ashery, Legion, Peregrine
My Homebrew: Feats | Items | Monsters | Spells | Subclasses | Races
Guides: Creating Sub-Races Using Trait Options
WIP (feedback needed): Blood Mage, Chromatic Sorcerers, Summoner, Trickster Domain, Unlucky, Way of the Daoist (Drunken Master), Weapon Smith
Please don't reply to my posts unless you've read what they actually say.
Right, but that text comes from a general rule. Just because a general rule says a modifier cannot change it, a specific rule can still do exactly that because a specific rule beats a general rule when they contradict each other :) For instance, if you rolled a natural 20 attack against a hexblade warlock, and they used the armor of hexes feature to successfully turn the hit into a miss, would you say, "Sorry mate, natural 20 wins,"?
"Not all those who wander are lost"
That's not how specific beats general works; if you applied that logic then natural 1's would be impossible because literally any rule that adds any modifier would be more "specific" because it's telling you to add something onto of the base ("general") roll.
Specific beats general would mean that if a rule states that something different happens when you roll a 1, then you use that rule instead. An ability that lets you re-roll 1's for example would apply, because instead of the 1 being a failure, it's now a re-roll, though this usually also state "you must use the second result" so if you roll another 1, that's the second result, which is a natural 1 as normal and therefore misses no matter what.
Characters: Bullette, Chortle, Dracarys Noir, Edward Merryspell, Habard Ashery, Legion, Peregrine
My Homebrew: Feats | Items | Monsters | Spells | Subclasses | Races
Guides: Creating Sub-Races Using Trait Options
WIP (feedback needed): Blood Mage, Chromatic Sorcerers, Summoner, Trickster Domain, Unlucky, Way of the Daoist (Drunken Master), Weapon Smith
Please don't reply to my posts unless you've read what they actually say.
(my emphasis)
This is correct. Any specific rule that contradicts this general rule would apply. But there are very few specific rules that do this. The lucky feat and halfling luck were two examples listed earlier.
I propose that focused aim is another example that falls into this category.I'm not trying to put words in your mouth, but to go back to my earlier post, you appear to be saying that these two rules do not directly contradict each other and therefore my second bullet point would apply. If the two rules do not contradict each other, then we must find a way to apply both the rules to the situation. How do we do that and still end up with the attack roll being a 1 at the end?
EDIT: While I stand behind the logic in this statement, my overall premise is incorrect for reasons I explain below.
"Not all those who wander are lost"
Turns out I'm wrong if you think of focused aim as a modifier because then it doesn't contradict the general rule.
"Not all those who wander are lost"