If you aren't interested in other people's take, why bother posting?
When people post things that are constructive and in line with the premise of the OP, I
AM interested.
Example:
I'd only do that if also giving a minimum of 15 on a roll with advantage.
Interesting quirk of the system: Reliable Talent does not affect passive scores.
This post dealt with responding to my idea, and offered a way to balance it out, which I feel was a great idea and I said so.
For everyone clamoring "don't nerf it", it is a waste of time.
I've argued for years that posts should agree with the basic premise of the original premise, or be moderated as the derailing it is. (A poster that disagrees with your very thread premise can start his own thread instead of pooping in yours)
Sadly, I have had no luck in convincing the mod team how this far too often blights constructive discussion on the site.
Agreed. I often read thread OPs which I don't agree with and I think aren't a good idea, or are just plain silly, and the best policy if I have nothing to contribute is not to bother. At worst (which I am fine with really) is someone saying "Well, I don't think it is a good idea, but if it works for you have fun."
If the initial premise is based on a fundamental misunderstanding of the purpose of a rule, isn't it reasonable for other people to try and explain why it is the way it is?
It isn't. Reliable Talent still functions normally when there is no disadvantage or advantage.
IF the purpose of the rule was to help mitigate disadvantage, it would have either:
A. granted advantage to checks instead of putting a floor on them, or
B. specified in the feature that it worked even if the rogue had disadvantage on the check.
Since it does neither, it is perfectly reasonable to rule the reliable talent only applies to one die. If you have the Lucky feat and have disadvantage, you can only reroll one die, after all.
Finally, rogue is one of my two most beloved classes (along with wizard). I play them quite often.
I find reliable talent TOO good, especially in situations which force disadvantage.
Even making it a floor of 5 instead of 10 when there is disadvantage will allow it to "help" 36% of the time. Now, if I ruled reliable talent could not be used
AT ALL when there was disadvantage, I would agree
THAT would be nerfing it, because then you don't get to use it at all.