Recent content by Valdier

I am building a fighter (first one in 5e) and while I've played/run a lot of games, I've never played a straight fighter. We have a couple house rules in play that tone back GWM and SS. Instead of -5/+10, they instead add a straight +3 damage per attack. With that said, I'm considering a...

Action Options 31 Automatic Success 14 Building Strongholds 25 Crafting Magic Items 23 Encumbrance 27 Facing 1 Feats 21 Healer's Kit Dependency 23 Hitting Cover 18 Initiative Variants 21 Injuries 18 Inspiration 30 Level Advancement without XP 6 Massive Damage 22 Mixing Potions 31 Morale 30 More...

Action Options 30 Automatic Success 14 Building Strongholds 26 Crafting Magic Items 23 Encumbrance 27 Facing 11 Feats 22 Healer's Kit Dependency 24 Hitting Cover 18 Initiative Variants 21 Injuries 18 Inspiration 29 Level Advancement without XP 8 Massive Damage 22 Mixing Potions 32 Morale 30 More...

So let me make sure I understand correctly. The player, who, can only roll, if they knowingly fail a roll (because that is exactly what it says), doesn't have the right to know, if they fail, even though, it's required for them to use it? That is kinda the entire point of the thread. RAW, the...

Agreed, which is why I said as much, in your initial post, when you suggested it as a way to handle it. It requires you to be a really bad sport as a DM, and I'm glad I don't play a table with a DM that would suggest such an option, like you did, on page 1. "Just set a DC to find nothing and...

That is certainly a good way to say the class is a complete failure at your table. To make sure they are out of psi points in the first three rounds of waking up every day. "You wake up, make a perception check. Yep, you failed to see anything... want to roll a die? Ok, dice was spent. There...

That isn't even "kinda" correct. It's in black and white when the condition can trigger. I copied the relevant text directly from the book above.

That is certainly a house rule your group can play with, but does not pair up with the rules as written. I think it's a good way to handle it at your table though. My concern though is rules as written, especially for environments like AL.

Except factually under the Knack write up, it explicitly says it does.

Yes, it does. It literally says it in black and white. No, that's not what's written. They can only spend the di when they fail a check. The DM MUST tell them for them to spend the die. And the DM has to tell them, right then, if they failed or not, so they can choose to then spend the die...

I get that as an option, but that isn't how it works. If you fail, you can spend a die, you don't declare it ahead of time, anymore than you declare shield ahead of time. You get to know before you try to spend it that you failed RAW.

That is a way to handle it, except under the ability it specifically says, "you can spend a die when you fail a roll". So... they know when they failed and succeeded?

But that isn't how the ability is written to work? They know if they succeed or fail.

So reading through the Soulknife I noticed, the can use this, anytime they fail an ability check. If they succeed they spend the point, if they fail they don't. As a DM, how will you handle this? Some examples: "I search for a secret door" "You don't find anything, but... you know you failed...

So reading through the Soulknife I noticed, the can use this, anytime they fail an ability check. If they succeed they spend the point, if they fail they don't. As a DM, how will you handle this? Some examples: "I search for a secret door" "You don't find anything, but... you know you...