11
\$\begingroup\$

This question already has an answer here:

Crawford's answer as quoted below

Rolling a 1 or 20, PHB pg 194

[...] If the d20 roll for an attack is a 1, the attack misses regardless of any modifiers or the target's AC.

Lucky Feat, PHB pg 167

[...]You can choose to spend one of your luck points after you roll the die, but before the outcome is determined.

Rolling a 1 on an attack roll (Nat 1) is often called being an auto-fail and with a good reason. Is it intended for these rolls to be instant failure/success? Because as soon as you see that 1 on the die you know: you have failed and there is a limited number of ways to change that. The question is: "Is Lucky one of them?".

I can see a DM calling "You have failed so hard that even your inexplicable luck can't get you out of this one", and it is usually fun for the players when something so unlucky happens to someone else. At least in my experience. My question is if it was meant to be like that as seeing that 1 alone can be a confirmation for failure. Are features like Lucky(dice manipulation features) worded that way to prevent these manipulations?

\$\endgroup\$

marked as duplicate by Sdjz, Jason_c_o, Oblivious Sage, FenrirG, NautArch dnd-5e May 29 '18 at 14:37

This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.

  • \$\begingroup\$ Is ther anything about the wording of either that makes you think you can't? \$\endgroup\$ – Jason_c_o May 29 '18 at 14:26
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Jason_c_o Yes, my thought was as rolling 1 or 20 on attack rolls are always failures or successes, you'd know the outcome so you shouldn't be able to use Lucky. Of course after reading the answers i realise that's not how it is. \$\endgroup\$ – FenrirG May 29 '18 at 14:29
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @FenrirG I don't think that lacking a quote in an answer is enough to distinguish the questions. The linked question seems to be more generic and already including your case. Maybe the answers there could be improved with the quote though. \$\endgroup\$ – Sdjz May 29 '18 at 14:34
11
\$\begingroup\$

Yes.

Simply getting a Nat1 or Nat20 doesn't mean the outcome has been determined. (I Knew this question would be useful someday)

As I mention in this other question, you can still use Lucky for Death Saving Throws, and the outcome is instantly determined in the instant you roll them (as there are no modifiers and the DC is constant), so there's no reason to think this is different for Nat 1s or Nat 20s.

Thanks to NautArch, Crawford also states this in one of his tweets.

Even a 20 isn't immune to the Lucky feat. #DnD

Since 20s are the same as 1s (just the opposite, but the same in the sense of "determining the outcome instantly"), the same shoud apply to 1s.

\$\endgroup\$

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.