D&D 5E What makes the Lucky feat so good?

[UngeheuerLich]

If you are referring to PHB page 173, I am afraid I fell for that too... :/

While that paragraph indicates what is probably the RAI, its RAW unfortunately doesn't help with Lucky. Can you spot the reason?

You may be right. It is rerolling a die. Bit nontheless i don't think it is as clear as you might think. The feat clearly speaks about "the die" so it might be that you have to first determine which die is meant by the usual means of disadvantage.

And a different question. Page 173 also does not tell us how you rule divination wizards replacement dice...

 

[Li Shenron]

I'm one of those DMs Saelorn talks about in his reply. I have no idea what my players' saving throw bonuses are when I call for a roll. I don't really pay attention to their stats to begin with, though I will learn the specifics over time as they get used in play. But even then, the values may change at any time; the character might be under the effects of spells or conditions that boost or harm them, they might have given their save boosting amulet to another player - or received one - without me noticing. Any number of things.

I don't think I could ever say with certainty that a character is gonna fail on a 20.

But I assume what you really meant to say was "A sensible DM probably should not ask for a ST roll if he knows it fails also on a 20." Right?

Ok...

 

[Li Shenron]

The feat relies on the assumed encounter work-load, but I think most people do much less encounters per day and thus Lucky becomes really quite good because you're rolling overall like a third of the assumed rolls (roughly) the system thinks you'd be making.

I am not sure. The less encounters per day, the less number of (bad) saving throws you roll, the higher the chance you're left with unused lucky points. You can increase your lucky point utilisation by using it on bad attack rolls, but they are generally not worth the same unless an important special ability depends on that.

 

[Li Shenron]

You may be right. It is rerolling a die. Bit nontheless i don't think it is as clear as you might think. The feat clearly speaks about "the die" so it might be that you have to first determine which die is meant by the usual means of disadvantage.

Yes that was the RAW problem. Page 173 talks about rerolling a die, but Lucky makes you roll an additional die.

I agree that the sentence in Lucky that says "die" increases ambiguity.

In fact, I just think that the designers weren't thinking of disadvantage when they wrote the feat. It just didn't come to their mind.

But also note that IIRC the sentence "You can choose to spend one of your luck points after you roll the die, but before the outcome is determined." wasn't in the playtest, it wad added only in the PHB. So this means that the Lucky feat was certainly scrutinized, and possibly given playtester feedback. How did thousands of playtesters not think about the mess with disadvantage, remains a mystery to me.

WotC doesn't want to make rules revision, but they say they still use errata for clarification. Lucky certainly deserves at least the latter.

 

[5ekyu]

Well I just said that 2/day or maybe even just 1/day and IMHO the feat would still be worth...

There is way too much theorycraft in our discussion by now. In practice, I think I would personally 'save up' my lucky points to when I'm down to few HP* or anyway fearing for my life, and probably end up often with unused lucky points. But I am quite a conservative player when it comes to finite resources.

*although lucky points don't work well when applied to someone else's attack against you, since most DMs won't roll in the open

Still... the more you guys talk about "key moments" as they were clearly identifyable, the more I am having doubts about my original opinion... because in 5e there aren't actually that many, there are few save-or-die effects for instance, and you cannot use Lucky to make someone elsr fail their ST against your spell, only your attacks or your own saves... so you can use it offensively only on some attack roll. If you have a winner ability that applies on weapon attacks or a save-or-die spell delivered with an attack roll, that's what you should use your Lucky points with, otherwise you are going to use them defensively.

"since most DMs won't roll in the open "

I know some gms dont roll in the open and some do. I have not got any basis to make a statement about most. I am not sure that anyone does.

But i do recall a sage question or two about rolling open or behind screen and the impact on dice reroll type abikities and the sage or mearls response was to the effect that if someone wanted to use or asked about using such an ability **they in their games** would show that roll even if they normally rolled behind screen etc.

It would seem that a feature which says "after you see the roll" should qualify you to ask to see the roll, right?

Maybe only in some games.. If not in most.

 

[5ekyu]

I am not sure. The less encounters per day, the less number of (bad) saving throws you roll, the higher the chance you're left with unused lucky points. You can increase your lucky point utilisation by using it on bad attack rolls, but they are generally not worth the same unless an important special ability depends on that.

Unused luck points because you did not have enough bad rolls on key things to use them up ***does not*** lower the value of the feat.

At rhe end of the day, whether you used one luck point or all three what matters is did you fail a roll at a key moment that mattered.

If the answer is no... Great.

Its like insurance, having it and not need to useit to the max is still dang good.

 

[flametitan]

I've not had it come up in my games, but that's mostly because we've yet to hit a point where feats mattered, and my players refuse to play humans. I will say it's a strong feat (and will likely dial it back to prevent super advantage), but that's mostly just out of the theoretical versatility and power it has, rather than practice.

Of course, it should be noted that while it's a statistically powerful feat, that doesn't mean it'll always work in the moment. Let's say you roll your save and get a 3, and decide what you're saving against is worth a Lucky point. There's an 85% chance that you'll get a better roll (even if only marginally, like a 4), but there's still a 15% chance you'll get the same result or worse (though with a 3, there isn't much downhill left to go).

 

[Li Shenron]

I've not had it come up in my games, but that's mostly because we've yet to hit a point where feats mattered, and my players refuse to play humans. I will say it's a strong feat (and will likely dial it back to prevent super advantage), but that's mostly just out of the theoretical versatility and power it has, rather than practice.

Of course, it should be noted that while it's a statistically powerful feat, that doesn't mean it'll always work in the moment. Let's say you roll your save and get a 3, and decide what you're saving against is worth a Lucky point. There's an 85% chance that you'll get a better roll (even if only marginally, like a 4), but there's still a 15% chance you'll get the same result or worse (though with a 3, there isn't much downhill left to go).

Exactly... but even more than that, 85% chance of rolling better does NOT mean 85% chance of success. You still need to hit the DC/AC with the Lucky roll. It doesn't automatically turn a failure into success (except in that corner case we already mentioned when you have disadvantage and roll a failure and a success).

 

[Quartz]

Yes, by the RAW this is how it goes down.

You roll a respectable 16 but you suffer disadvantage and have to roll a second die and take the lowest. You roll 3. Darn. Failure.

But wait! You use Lucky to roll one more die... and roll 2. F*ck.

BUT THE RULES ALLOW YOU TO SELECT THE 16.

Really? That's not how I read it, though I do see how you can read it that way. I read it as you roll with disadvantage and get 16 & 3 so the result is 3. You then use Lucky to re-roll that and get 2. Oh well...

 

[CapnZapp]

Really? That's not how I read it, though I do see how you can read it that way. I read it as you roll with disadvantage and get 16 & 3 so the result is 3. You then use Lucky to re-roll that and get 2. Oh well...

I didn't read it that way either. Then Jeremy Crawford came to my house and told me I played the game wrong.







(The value of Lucky remains high even if your DM dismisses "super advantage". Out of my three reasons why - in my answer to the OP's question - it is of course the least important)