D&D 5E Do you allow lucky feat and Wiz. divination portent feature for downtime activity rolls?

[Rya.Reisender]

Since the duration of a rest is always listed as "at least x hours", I'd say a whole downtime episode is a single long rest, so you won't recover any abilities until you resume adventuring.

 

[The Crimson Binome]

Yikes! I've never played GURPS, but it sounds like a slog.

It's really not that bad. It's just that there are a lot of moving parts, because there are a lot of options available, and sometimes they can have unexpected interactions.

Powerful enchantments are supposed to be rare, and the cumulative chance of a catastrophic setback is the way they do that. But the game also covers genres where luck makes sense as a mechanic, and using luck to negate the failure chance is one of the known exploits in the system. Given the sheer number of possible ability combinations, it barely even warrants mention. It's just kind of what happens, with free-form point-buy systems.

 

[S'mon]

I'd allow it, but I use 1 week long rests. The game seems to work much better that way.

 

[Rya.Reisender]

I'd allow it, but I use 1 week long rests. The game seems to work much better that way.

Does that really make much difference for downtime activity that requires rolls? A lot of downtime activity takes longer than several days after all.
[MENTION=6796661]MNblockhead[/MENTION]
I'm curious what kind of activity your players are doing that requires rolls and you consider problematic if they allowed to apply lucky each time?

 

[S'mon]

I haven't seen a PC use lucky fear in downtime but I have seen a PC make more than one check in a week of downtime.

 

[clearstream]

By RAW it seems that players should be able to use the lucky feat or the Wizard School of Divination Portent Feature for skill checks required by downtime activities. However, given the ample opportunity for long rest during extended downtime, is this not almost guaranteeing good results?

I have a player who is considering a build that will have both. That's 5 re-rolls per long rest, two of which can be used for one check.

With XGE variants there is at least "complication" rolls, which the Lucky Feat won't help with.

I'm inclined to allow it because I like to follow RAW and I also like the idea of the trope of the lucky sob who is always finding what he needs and getting good deals. I don't think it would break anything, but this is the first campaign where downtime with figure prominently.

Has anyone used a lot of downtime activities where characters made heavy use of the lucky feat? How did that impact the game?

For my campaign, I rule that ability checks are made at an indeterminate moment over the duration of the activity. In the case of downtime activities, that would be an indeterminate moment over the work week (or weeks).

That means Lucky/Divination/Guidance/Bardic Inspiration can be applied if the character applying them is on hand and ready to go over the entire duration. That yields two scenarios -

1. A character with Lucky/Divination/Guidance/Peerless Skill can apply the bonus to their own work
2. A character with Divination/Guidance/Bardic Inspiration can give up doing work of their own, to be on hand to apply the bonus to another's work

 

[Ymdar]

I’d allow using this. If a characters is lucky and can see into the future, chances are they will be more successful.

 

[MNblockhead]

Does that really make much difference for downtime activity that requires rolls? A lot of downtime activity takes longer than several days after all.

[MENTION=6796661]MNblockhead[/MENTION]
I'm curious what kind of activity your players are doing that requires rolls and you consider problematic if they allowed to apply lucky each time?

Session Zero is this Saturday, so it hasn't come up yet. But a player asked by e-mail. He is on the fence between school of divination and school of abjuration and if he can use portent on downtime skill checks, it may push him into selecting divination. He asked about lucky feat in the same e-mail but later said he's not really interested in that. But I figure I better have an answer in case someone does.

Downtime and resource management will figure heavily into this campaign. Most importantly, training is required to level up. The base cost and time for training is modified based upon a number of skill checks relevant to your class. The campaign will also use the Rivals mechanics from XGE and so some of the social intrigue downtime activities may become important.

 

[Rya.Reisender]

Most importantly, training is required to level up. The base cost and time for training is modified based upon a number of skill checks relevant to your class.

That's not a core rule, right?

Why not make the cost and time fixed? Seems more fun, than Player A needing to pay double as much and take double as long for his level up than Player B just because he rolled worse.

 

[clearstream]

Downtime and resource management will figure heavily into this campaign. Most importantly, training is required to level up. The base cost and time for training is modified based upon a number of skill checks relevant to your class. The campaign will also use the Rivals mechanics from XGE and so some of the social intrigue downtime activities may become important.

I've been thinking about training. I like the sound of skill checks for time and costs, applied in the following way.

Say I require that a named trainer be found, who must be higher level than the trainee. This obviously becomes more difficult and more interesting as characters advanced. Characters then need to show them that they are worth taking on: the named trainer increasing their time and costs if they can't prove themselves. ("You clearly need a lot of practice and are barely worth my effort, but very well then, pay me double and it'll take twice as long!")

Characters who find themselves unable to afford the cost can find a different named trainer to try to impress (i.e. they get to reattempt their checks). I think this could have a nice feel, so long as the DM has the stomach to actually block a character who can't afford it from levelling!