A large part of what make D&D an "adventure" is the randomness that leads to dramatic moments. Lucky essentially puts a foot on the scale in the player's favor, so that the really important campaign defining moments may never properly take shape. With 3 uses per day, there is a pretty good chance that the player will always succeed when it matters.
The Lucky feat isn't particularly OP for combat, but it disrupts the story itself. There is a reason that DM Inspiration is typically capped at (1).
Another feat that isn't "OP", but can be frustrating is the Keen Mind feat. It doesn't really provide anything mechanical, but if gives the player a perfect memory for the last month of in-game time. This essentially forces the DM to keep track of all of the player's notes for them, in precise detail, or spontaneously fill in information that simply doesn't matter, whenever the player wants to know something.
As written, the Lucky Feat can turn Disadvantage into Super Advantage. Meaning you can close your eyes and use Lucky to have a better chance of hitting your target. It breaks suspension of disbelief a bit.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Canto alla vita alla sua bellezza ad ogni sua ferita ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
As written, the Lucky Feat can turn Disadvantage into Super Advantage. Meaning you can close your eyes and use Lucky to have a better chance of hitting your target. It breaks suspension of disbelief a bit.
Well, not necessarily. Everyone knows that once in a million chances happen all the time. It's called narrativium. ;)
Lucky is not so much overpowered as it is against the spirit of the game, for many tables. The dice decide how one's efforts pan out. One can try and fish for lower DCs, advantage, a better skill, whatever they can do to hedge their bets, but Lucky disregards all of that and allows a player to say "I'm just gonna keep rolling until I get the number I want". Many DMs don't care for that and insist that Lucky have some grounding in the character's story before the player can take it. Wild Magic sorcerers, with their connection to chance and (physical) chaos, are often allowed some leeway (one cool house rule I saw allowed Wild Magic sorcerers to spend a Luck point to reroll a Wild Magic Surge, once per surge. Made Wild Magic much less obnoxious), as are characters connected to a luck deity. But ordinary Schmoe having the ability to directly bend the cosmos to his whim simply because he doesn't like bad rolls?
Lucky is not so much overpowered as it is against the spirit of the game, for many tables. The dice decide how one's efforts pan out. One can try and fish for lower DCs, advantage, a better skill, whatever they can do to hedge their bets, but Lucky disregards all of that and allows a player to say "I'm just gonna keep rolling until I get the number I want". Many DMs don't care for that and insist that Lucky have some grounding in the character's story before the player can take it. Wild Magic sorcerers, with their connection to chance and (physical) chaos, are often allowed some leeway (one cool house rule I saw allowed Wild Magic sorcerers to spend a Luck point to reroll a Wild Magic Surge, once per surge. Made Wild Magic much less obnoxious), as are characters connected to a luck deity. But ordinary Schmoe having the ability to directly bend the cosmos to his whim simply because he doesn't like bad rolls?
That's a DM paddling. Much of the time, anyways.
I think that's more the sentiment is that you are in a bad situation but you somehow turn it into an advantage. I could see it working thematically on some characters like halflings where its like even halflings consider you lucky by their standards. Turns out you are blessed by a god of Luck like Tymora or something.
Otherwise its seen as sort of a cop out and I can't blame some DMs for banning it. I used to ban it but I have since decided not to as it still has a cost if you take it over other feats and its limited to 3 rolls a day.
Just cap it at one use per roll... problem solved. You have 'inexplicable luck' doesn't mean it's always good luck.
Also, I find a lot of DMs don't remember the second part of this - 'You can choose to spend one of your luck points after you roll the die, but before the outcome is determined.'
Just cap it at one use per roll... problem solved. You have 'inexplicable luck' doesn't mean it's always good luck.
Also, I find a lot of DMs don't remember the second part of this - 'You can choose to spend one of your luck points after you roll the die, but before the outcome is determined.'
I may be wrong....but it was always one use per roll?
The issue stated was that you can turn disadvantage to super advantage with a single use.
The wording states "you can spend one luck point to roll an additional d20. You can choose to spend one of your luck points after you roll the die, but before the outcome is determined. You choose which of the d20s is used for the attack roll, ability check, or saving throw"
So you can roll the die and you now have 3 dice to pick the best number from.
Super Advantage from disadvantage is not a thing for any DM who has the slightest sense. A disadvantage roll states "roll two d20s and use the lowest." That states the higher d20 is discarded. I know Crawford has ruled otherwise but he's incorrect in this instance. The proper way to resolve a Lucky disadvantage roll is to roll the original check, with disadvantage, and figure out which d20 remains from that roll, then roll the Lucky d20. You still effectively get to reverse disadvantage into regular advantage, but you don't get to turn it into SuperMegaUltra Roll-However-Many-Dice-You-Like-age.
Super Advantage from disadvantage is not a thing for any DM who has the slightest sense. A disadvantage roll states "roll two d20s and use the lowest." That states the higher d20 is discarded. I know Crawford has ruled otherwise but he's incorrect in this instance. The proper way to resolve a Lucky disadvantage roll is to roll the original check, with disadvantage, and figure out which d20 remains from that roll, then roll the Lucky d20. You still effectively get to reverse disadvantage into regular advantage, but you don't get to turn it into SuperMegaUltra Roll-However-Many-Dice-You-Like-age.
Yeah even turning disadvantage into advantage is a pretty big deal for some DMs so I can see the ire. Overall for me its not been a big deal as even with it available my players have never picked it. Its a "always pretty good" pick but seems to be low on the actual pick list for most as another feat always seems to be better fit for the build.
Super Advantage from disadvantage is not a thing for any DM who has the slightest sense. A disadvantage roll states "roll two d20s and use the lowest." That states the higher d20 is discarded. I know Crawford has ruled otherwise but he's incorrect in this instance. The proper way to resolve a Lucky disadvantage roll is to roll the original check, with disadvantage, and figure out which d20 remains from that roll, then roll the Lucky d20. You still effectively get to reverse disadvantage into regular advantage, but you don't get to turn it into SuperMegaUltra Roll-However-Many-Dice-You-Like-age.
That's a sensible house rule. However, technically Disadvantage says nothing about discarding anything, it just says to usethe lower result, which is overridden by the specificity of the Lucky Feat to useone of the player's choice. Like I said, your ruling makes sense, but the rules as written say slightly different.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Canto alla vita alla sua bellezza ad ogni sua ferita ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
Goody for them. Unless one is playing AL, at which point they deserve what they get and it's impossible to enjoy the game anyways, RAW for Lucky turning disadvantage into Elfy SuperMegaUltraAdvantage makes no bloody sense. Given the general DM attitude towards Lucky, a player can generally push for SuperMegaUltraAdvantage and the DM will say "All right. Lucky's banned", or they can agree to play something resembling fair and maybe actually get the feat.
Well, at the risk of drawing fire from all sides here....
IMO the better way to do it would be to roll with disadvantage, and then roll the Lucky with disadvantage and let the player pick which of those two disadvantaged rolls they use. That way it would simultaneously be both lucky and at disadvantage. Too bad RAW would never support that in any way.
Well, at the risk of drawing fire from all sides here....
IMO the better way to do it would be to roll with disadvantage, and then roll the Lucky with disadvantage and let the player pick which of those two disadvantaged rolls they use. That way it would simultaneously be both lucky and at disadvantage. Too bad RAW would never support that in any way.
I agree that this is the way it ought to be run, which would also open up "Super Advantage" for using Lucky on rolls that already have Advantage. A rogue could use this to essentially roll 4 dice to phish for critical Sneak Attack. With Elven Accuracy, that could go up to 6 dice, which starts to get a bit absurd. However, if someone is willing to blow 2 feats to get a <30% chance of a critical hit 3x per day... eh... I'd have to see it in play. A Nat 20 doesn't automatically mean success in skill checks, and doesn't ignore resistances and immunities, so it's got a definite potential cap.
A large part of what make D&D an "adventure" is the randomness that leads to dramatic moments. Lucky essentially puts a foot on the scale in the player's favor, so that the really important campaign defining moments may never properly take shape. With 3 uses per day, there is a pretty good chance that the player will always succeed when it matters.
A large part of what make D&D an "adventure" is the randomness that leads to dramatic moments. Lucky essentially puts a foot on the scale in the player's favor, so that the really important campaign defining moments may never properly take shape. With 3 uses per day, there is a pretty good chance that the player will always succeed when it matters.
The Lucky feat isn't particularly OP for combat, but it disrupts the story itself. There is a reason that DM Inspiration is typically capped at (1).
Another feat that isn't "OP", but can be frustrating is the Keen Mind feat. It doesn't really provide anything mechanical, but if gives the player a perfect memory for the last month of in-game time. This essentially forces the DM to keep track of all of the player's notes for them, in precise detail, or spontaneously fill in information that simply doesn't matter, whenever the player wants to know something.
A large part of what make D&D an "adventure" is the randomness that leads to dramatic moments. Lucky essentially puts a foot on the scale in the player's favor, so that the really important campaign defining moments may never properly take shape. With 3 uses per day, there is a pretty good chance that the player will always succeed when it matters.
The Lucky feat isn't particularly OP for combat, but it disrupts the story itself. There is a reason that DM Inspiration is typically capped at (1).
Another feat that isn't "OP", but can be frustrating is the Keen Mind feat. It doesn't really provide anything mechanical, but if gives the player a perfect memory for the last month of in-game time. This essentially forces the DM to keep track of all of the player's notes for them, in precise detail, or spontaneously fill in information that simply doesn't matter, whenever the player wants to know something.
A large part of what make D&D an "adventure" is the randomness that leads to dramatic moments. Lucky essentially puts a foot on the scale in the player's favor, so that the really important campaign defining moments may never properly take shape. With 3 uses per day, there is a pretty good chance that the player will always succeed when it matters.
The Lucky feat isn't particularly OP for combat, but it disrupts the story itself. There is a reason that DM Inspiration is typically capped at (1).
So is this an "ideal" feat for bards to seduce, convince or intimidate NPCs? Or in more general to help at skill checks?
So is this an "ideal" feat for bards to seduce, convince or intimidate NPCs? Or in more general to help at skill checks?
Sure, a Bard who has an insatiable need to seduce NPCs should probably get lucky as quickly as possible.
However, Lucky is really better for avoiding failure, than increasing success. No matter how much advantage you have, you can't roll higher than 20+mod, so something that gives you a flat bonus is more likely to unlock better rewards. Advantage is comparable to a +5 bonus for a DC that you can already reach, but the difference between a roll of 20 (+0) and 25 (+5) could make all of the difference.
For example, the War Cleric's Channel Divinity: Guided Strike grants +10 to an attack roll, which can allow a normal player to make an otherwise impossible shot, even without a Nat 20.
A Bard who wishes to be Persuasion/Intimidation based should A) Get Expertise, B) Get Advantage, C) Max out Charisma. So, really, a Bard has better things to spend their ABI on than the Lucky feat, at least through level 12. Frequently, advantage can be gained from the Help action performed by an ally, your Wingman, so to speak.
Lucky is probably best for a Rogue, who will be sticking their face in deadly traps, attempting to stealth past dragons, and who really, really need that Sneak Attack to land during the surprise round.
Goody for them. Unless one is playing AL, at which point they deserve what they get and it's impossible to enjoy the game anyways, RAW for Lucky turning disadvantage into Elfy SuperMegaUltraAdvantage makes no bloody sense.
From a narrative standpoint it makes a lot of sense. It's all those times the hero is down to their last shot, their last ounce of 'oomph' or the last draw of the cards. Everything seems stacked against them but due to pure luck they manage pull through anyways. It can be fantastic and it so happens to be at a very crucial moment, so much better narratively.
It definitely doesn't "ruin" a campaign, it just takes the wind out of its sails. A clever DM can build in contingencies that can make it work, but it does mean more work for the DM.
The issue is that it's three "Epic moments" Every. Single. Day. Failing dramatically is part of what makes a story compelling and there aren't usually that many adventure defining moments at any given time.
Also, I find a lot of DMs don't remember the second part of this - 'You can choose to spend one of your luck points after you roll the die, but before the outcome is determined.'
A lot of the time the outcome is determine at the instant the outcome is determined.
It is very rare for a monster to change AC mid battle of have different DCs for different spells so if last round the monster though an AoE at the party and a 14 fails the save and a 16 suceeded you can be pretty sure the next round that the DC will be 15 or 16.
I have not once had a DM ask for a concentration check before telling the player what the damage was so the player knows as soon as they roll if they have suceeded or not
I have known DMs say the DC of a skill check, I think this is a bit sloppy but does save time if the players have a tensancy to fish for it (How heavy does the portcullis look how likely does it look that I can lift it up?)
My preferred house rule for lucky is that it the player may use the lucky dice roll to replace one of the original rolls. This makes no difference for straight and advantage rolls but for disadvantage rolls only makes sense if you rolled one die high and the other low.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Many DMs seem to dislike or ban this feat. However I have never seen serious builds incorporating it.
In case of warriors I saw Great weapon master + Polearm master
Xbow guy + sharpshooter
Polearm guy + Sentinel
But never GWM + Lucky for example.
Yes, yes, it helps the player with saves. But what else if many thinks it's OP?
A large part of what make D&D an "adventure" is the randomness that leads to dramatic moments. Lucky essentially puts a foot on the scale in the player's favor, so that the really important campaign defining moments may never properly take shape. With 3 uses per day, there is a pretty good chance that the player will always succeed when it matters.
The Lucky feat isn't particularly OP for combat, but it disrupts the story itself. There is a reason that DM Inspiration is typically capped at (1).
Another feat that isn't "OP", but can be frustrating is the Keen Mind feat. It doesn't really provide anything mechanical, but if gives the player a perfect memory for the last month of in-game time. This essentially forces the DM to keep track of all of the player's notes for them, in precise detail, or spontaneously fill in information that simply doesn't matter, whenever the player wants to know something.
As written, the Lucky Feat can turn Disadvantage into Super Advantage. Meaning you can close your eyes and use Lucky to have a better chance of hitting your target. It breaks suspension of disbelief a bit.
Canto alla vita
alla sua bellezza
ad ogni sua ferita
ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty
To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me
The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
Well, not necessarily. Everyone knows that once in a million chances happen all the time. It's called narrativium. ;)
Lucky is not so much overpowered as it is against the spirit of the game, for many tables. The dice decide how one's efforts pan out. One can try and fish for lower DCs, advantage, a better skill, whatever they can do to hedge their bets, but Lucky disregards all of that and allows a player to say "I'm just gonna keep rolling until I get the number I want". Many DMs don't care for that and insist that Lucky have some grounding in the character's story before the player can take it. Wild Magic sorcerers, with their connection to chance and (physical) chaos, are often allowed some leeway (one cool house rule I saw allowed Wild Magic sorcerers to spend a Luck point to reroll a Wild Magic Surge, once per surge. Made Wild Magic much less obnoxious), as are characters connected to a luck deity. But ordinary Schmoe having the ability to directly bend the cosmos to his whim simply because he doesn't like bad rolls?
That's a DM paddling. Much of the time, anyways.
Please do not contact or message me.
I think that's more the sentiment is that you are in a bad situation but you somehow turn it into an advantage. I could see it working thematically on some characters like halflings where its like even halflings consider you lucky by their standards. Turns out you are blessed by a god of Luck like Tymora or something.
Otherwise its seen as sort of a cop out and I can't blame some DMs for banning it. I used to ban it but I have since decided not to as it still has a cost if you take it over other feats and its limited to 3 rolls a day.
Just cap it at one use per roll... problem solved. You have 'inexplicable luck' doesn't mean it's always good luck.
Also, I find a lot of DMs don't remember the second part of this - 'You can choose to spend one of your luck points after you roll the die, but before the outcome is determined.'
I may be wrong....but it was always one use per roll?
The issue stated was that you can turn disadvantage to super advantage with a single use.
The wording states "you can spend one luck point to roll an additional d20. You can choose to spend one of your luck points after you roll the die, but before the outcome is determined. You choose which of the d20s is used for the attack roll, ability check, or saving throw"
So you can roll the die and you now have 3 dice to pick the best number from.
Super Advantage from disadvantage is not a thing for any DM who has the slightest sense. A disadvantage roll states "roll two d20s and use the lowest." That states the higher d20 is discarded. I know Crawford has ruled otherwise but he's incorrect in this instance. The proper way to resolve a Lucky disadvantage roll is to roll the original check, with disadvantage, and figure out which d20 remains from that roll, then roll the Lucky d20. You still effectively get to reverse disadvantage into regular advantage, but you don't get to turn it into SuperMegaUltra Roll-However-Many-Dice-You-Like-age.
Please do not contact or message me.
Yeah even turning disadvantage into advantage is a pretty big deal for some DMs so I can see the ire. Overall for me its not been a big deal as even with it available my players have never picked it. Its a "always pretty good" pick but seems to be low on the actual pick list for most as another feat always seems to be better fit for the build.
However I do get it.
That's a sensible house rule. However, technically Disadvantage says nothing about discarding anything, it just says to use the lower result, which is overridden by the specificity of the Lucky Feat to use one of the player's choice. Like I said, your ruling makes sense, but the rules as written say slightly different.
Canto alla vita
alla sua bellezza
ad ogni sua ferita
ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty
To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me
The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
Goody for them. Unless one is playing AL, at which point they deserve what they get and it's impossible to enjoy the game anyways, RAW for Lucky turning disadvantage into Elfy SuperMegaUltraAdvantage makes no bloody sense. Given the general DM attitude towards Lucky, a player can generally push for SuperMegaUltraAdvantage and the DM will say "All right. Lucky's banned", or they can agree to play something resembling fair and maybe actually get the feat.
Up to them, really.
Please do not contact or message me.
Well, at the risk of drawing fire from all sides here....
IMO the better way to do it would be to roll with disadvantage, and then roll the Lucky with disadvantage and let the player pick which of those two disadvantaged rolls they use. That way it would simultaneously be both lucky and at disadvantage. Too bad RAW would never support that in any way.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I agree that this is the way it ought to be run, which would also open up "Super Advantage" for using Lucky on rolls that already have Advantage. A rogue could use this to essentially roll 4 dice to phish for critical Sneak Attack. With Elven Accuracy, that could go up to 6 dice, which starts to get a bit absurd. However, if someone is willing to blow 2 feats to get a <30% chance of a critical hit 3x per day... eh... I'd have to see it in play. A Nat 20 doesn't automatically mean success in skill checks, and doesn't ignore resistances and immunities, so it's got a definite potential cap.
So is this an "ideal" feat for bards to seduce, convince or intimidate NPCs? Or in more general to help at skill checks?
Sure, a Bard who has an insatiable need to seduce NPCs should probably get lucky as quickly as possible.
However, Lucky is really better for avoiding failure, than increasing success. No matter how much advantage you have, you can't roll higher than 20+mod, so something that gives you a flat bonus is more likely to unlock better rewards. Advantage is comparable to a +5 bonus for a DC that you can already reach, but the difference between a roll of 20 (+0) and 25 (+5) could make all of the difference.
For example, the War Cleric's Channel Divinity: Guided Strike grants +10 to an attack roll, which can allow a normal player to make an otherwise impossible shot, even without a Nat 20.
A Bard who wishes to be Persuasion/Intimidation based should A) Get Expertise, B) Get Advantage, C) Max out Charisma. So, really, a Bard has better things to spend their ABI on than the Lucky feat, at least through level 12. Frequently, advantage can be gained from the Help action performed by an ally, your Wingman, so to speak.
Lucky is probably best for a Rogue, who will be sticking their face in deadly traps, attempting to stealth past dragons, and who really, really need that Sneak Attack to land during the surprise round.
From a narrative standpoint it makes a lot of sense. It's all those times the hero is down to their last shot, their last ounce of 'oomph' or the last draw of the cards. Everything seems stacked against them but due to pure luck they manage pull through anyways. It can be fantastic and it so happens to be at a very crucial moment, so much better narratively.
@Memnosyne
These don't sound like they could ruin a campaign.
It definitely doesn't "ruin" a campaign, it just takes the wind out of its sails. A clever DM can build in contingencies that can make it work, but it does mean more work for the DM.
The issue is that it's three "Epic moments" Every. Single. Day. Failing dramatically is part of what makes a story compelling and there aren't usually that many adventure defining moments at any given time.
A lot of the time the outcome is determine at the instant the outcome is determined.
My preferred house rule for lucky is that it the player may use the lucky dice roll to replace one of the original rolls. This makes no difference for straight and advantage rolls but for disadvantage rolls only makes sense if you rolled one die high and the other low.