a 7th stat?

[big teej]

greetings playgrounders,

for months I've been kicking around the idea of "a 7th stat" ... Luck.

it would be a VERY low impact stat

example of luck stat's use:

let's say that the party is fighting an ogre on a galleon. and the ogre misses an attack and chops the mast in half, causing it to collapse, a player could make a 'luck roll' to influence where it lands (i.e. "not on me" or "on the ogre" or "between me and the ogre" etc.) the more unlikely an event, the higher the DC.


would this be a totally outrageous and wonky idea? or is it worth giving it a try?


(my players have expressed consent, if not outright interest, in giving this a shot)

thoughts? questions? comments? suggestions? criticisms? "i'm an idiot?"


have at it

[Seerow]

I think what you're looking for is Karma from SR4


You put points into the stat like any other, and it basically gives you a spurt of on demand luck. You can use it for things like guaranteed go first on initiative and reroll any roll (and gain exploding dice when doing so). There's other uses too, but those are the main ones off the top of my head.

It wouldn't be too hard to port into D&D if you're using point buy. Make it a 7th stat, it cannot be your 8 stat. You have a luck pool that equals your Luck stat modifier. ie if you have 12 luck from stats, you have a +1 modifier, so 1 in your luck pool. If you have 16 in your luck pool, you have a +3 modifier, so 3 in your pool.

The cost of increasing stats in a point buy environment should be enough to discourage increasing it more than +1 for most players, +2 for an extreme case, as long as you introduce it without increasing your point buy limits.

[gbprime]

Action points (Eberron) work well for dumb luck too, and you don't need to mess with a stat to incorporate them. Might be easier.

[big teej]

I think what you're looking for is Karma from SR4
-snip-
The cost of increasing stats in a point buy environment should be enough to discourage increasing it more than +1 for most players, +2 for an extreme case, as long as you introduce it without increasing your point buy limits.

that does sound kinda neat, but far more of an impact than I'm looking for (provided I'm reading your post correctly, which I may not be )

I was thinking much more low impact "you miss the goblin"
....
'can I make a luck roll to see if I hit the goblin 30 feet behind him?'
sure, go for it
(DC: very high)

Action points (Eberron) work well for dumb luck too, and you don't need to mess with a stat to incorporate them. Might be easier.

I will look into this.... as soon as I get my hands on an eberon book... could you summarize its uses?

(provided you're allowed to do that)

[Glimbur]

Here's how it could work. The PC with the lowest luck has bad things happen to them. A pickpocket needs to steal from the party for the plot? Target Unlucky McGee. A falling rock hits someone? Breaks McOwnLegs takes the hit. Etc. So you could dump stat it... if you're brave.

[arguskos]

I will look into this.... as soon as I get my hands on an eberon book... could you summarize its uses?

(provided you're allowed to do that)

You can burn an action point to add 1d6 to any roll. That's... about it. You get an action point when the DM says so.

[GreyMantle]

I will look into this.... as soon as I get my hands on an eberon book... could you summarize its uses?

(provided you're allowed to do that)

As far as I know, the Eberron action points are the same variant as the one in Unearthed Arcana (which is totally OGL content). So here you go.
http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/ad...tionPoints.htm

[Kelb_Panthera]

Action points, can be found here: http://www.d20srd.org/srd/variant/ad...tionPoints.htm It's not exactly the same as the eberron action points rules, but I think it'll get the effect you want. Just drop whichever of the options listed that do more than you want.

[WinceRind]

There's also a whole line of Luck feats... Which are pretty horrible in my opinion.

I don't know, some kind of a Karma/luck stat might work well enough in a computer game (Fallout 1,2,3? And a whole lot of RPGs) because the "rolls" are hidden and all the possible outcomes are generally already in the game and it just affects which outcome is chosen... But in a real life DM should expect to improvise at some points, plus all the calculations are generally on the table and visible.

If implemented badly, it would just be another way to screw with DM. Kind of reminds me of one campaign where the DM clearly didn't fully understand the Sense Motive skill and one of the players just abused the hell out of incredibly high ranks in it, using it like some kind of instant plot solver. But that's equally the DM's fault in that case.

But in the example with the bridge falling, it seems just a bit pointless. If the DM wants the bridge to fall on you, it should damn well happen. If he doesn't, it won't or at least it won't do any serious harm. If shklee is really indecisive, there's always a secret roll or a toin coss =p

Plus Action points is already a pretty decent way to do that, and more.

[WinceRind]

Here's how it could work. The PC with the lowest luck has bad things happen to them. A pickpocket needs to steal from the party for the plot? Target Unlucky McGee. A falling rock hits someone? Breaks McOwnLegs takes the hit. Etc. So you could dump stat it... if you're brave.

But that just erodes the DM's control of the power of advancing the plot. If one character makes it a dump stat, he or she suddenly becomes the center of the campaign who's always getting kidnapped, hurt, cursed, and what not?

Things like that should stay at DM's discretion.

Plus it also takes away some of the player control over the situation.

And your examples kind of lead down a very slippery slope in my opinion... If the least luckiest player would take a hit from what can be decided randomly with a dice roll, what stops you from applying the same luck stat to attack rolls or saves?

I mean, if the players are in equal danger of being hit by the rock, whoever the rock falls upon should be decided randomly (or picked by DM for whatever reason, at least). If one player makes himself exposed to danger deliberately or out of general stupidity, then yeah, he deserves to be more likely to be hit by a falling rock if said danger is a possibility in the situation. But that's related to the player's intelligence, and the character's skills, not dumb luck.

[big teej]

You can burn an action point to add 1d6 to any roll. That's... about it. You get an action point when the DM says so.

ah, ... hm...

I may try that out for a session or two.


thankyou much and to both of you who provided links

[Vladislav]

There was a Luck mechanic I liked a lot in the Fighting Fantasy books. Your Luck score starts at 1d6+6 (7-12), and whenever you're in a tight spot, you can Test Your Luck, which is done by rolling 2d6 and comparing the result to your Luck score. (less than or equal = success). The key point was that each Test makes you lose 1 point of luck irrevocably* - ie., the more you rely on luck, the more it's likely to run out.

* not really irrevocably. You get Luck points back after a major story goal.

[Dr.Epic]

D&D is a game with enough luck (die rolls). It just seems like you're adding an unneeded element.

[big teej]

There was a Luck mechanic I liked a lot in the Fighting Fantasy books. Your Luck score starts at 1d6+6 (7-12), and whenever you're in a tight spot, you can Test Your Luck, which is done by rolling 2d6 and comparing the result to your Luck score. (less than or equal = success). The key point was that each Test makes you lose 1 point of luck irrevocably* - ie., the more you rely on luck, the more it's likely to run out.

* not really irrevocably. You get Luck points back after a major story goal.

...I actually really like this idea, probably even more than the others.

D&D is a game with enough luck (die rolls). It just seems like you're adding an unneeded element.

you can never have too many die rolls


on a more serious note, it was just a thought. besides, 'unneeded' or not, if the players love it who am I to argue?


besides.... my curiosity will get the best of me eventually

[Mando Knight]

If it's very low impact, then why have it at all? [/engineer] On the other hand, if it's luck, why should it be low impact, when it's luck and should be involved in everything? On the other other hand, the dice are luck/chance. If anything, luck should be an additional, static modifier to nearly all dice rolls.

[AstralFire]

I find this kind of ironic when Charisma is etymologically all about being favored by the divine. (Hence its many uses in D&D; the conflation of personality and divine favor, or 'luck.')

[n00b killa]

Make it a skill (give it to rogues, bards, etc...), and use CHA modifier for it

[VarianArdell]

There's also a whole line of Luck feats... Which are pretty horrible in my opinion.

Which book would those be in, then?

[Tyndmyr]

There's also a whole line of Luck feats... Which are pretty horrible in my opinion.

You must be joking...there are feats to allow you to:
Reroll init.
Treat a 1 on a save as a nat 20.
Ignore an attack that would otherwise kill you.

Sure, a lot of the other ones, like rerolling hits, tend to be a luck point sink, but luck feats are some of the most awesome defensive feats in the game.

Edit: Luck feats are in complete scoundrel.

Six stats is already too many, though. All you need are Brawn, Finesse, Resolve, Wits and Panache.

[Kelb_Panthera]

Luck feats give you a mechanical hand in adjusting your luck with the dice. You get to re-roll a particular check, depending on the feat, if you don't like the number your d20 turns up. This slightly raises the frequency with which you succeed at that check using the component that most represents luck. In-game, even though your character and another have the same training, the same physical/mental ability, and the same equipment; you succeed just a little more often. IMHO luck feats do a fantastic job of representing a character being just plain luckier than those around him.

Six stats is already too many, though. All you need are Brawn, Finesse, Resolve, Wits and Panache.

So you roll Str and Con together, but leave the other 4 alone? Why not roll wis and cha togehter since they both represent the strength of the character's mind? You could then call them Brawn, Finesse, Wits, and Mental Fortitude.

[Azernak0]

Like others have said, I say make it a skill dependent on everyone's favorite dump stat, Charisma. It will add some variance to the game, which *can* be neat. It might also let you avoid DM Fiat. Rather than just railroading someone to fall into a plot convenient hole or find some MacGuffin, have everyone make a Luck roll. If you ever randomly to see who gets ambushed or whatever, that seems like a great place to utilize Luck.

You could also just make it run off of Charisma alone. You ever notice that the really charismatic people in movies or games are always having fortune fall in their favor. Think of Han Solo or Nathan Drake: how often did force of personality or sheer blind, stupid luck save their hides?

I wouldn't add it as a stat because it can really screw with some characters who are MAD.

[Prospekt]

Change Constitution into Endurance, Dexterity into Agility, and Wisdom into Perception. Also add radiation and mutated chameleons to your campaign. Oh wait...

I can only think of one way it might help, and that would be in the use of untrained skills, basically- add a luck modifier to those, that might work. But for anything else, it's just like having an extra modifier for everything, which the whole point of having to roll a die in the first place to dodge/attack/resist is the whole luck factor already.

[Arceius]

I have actually implemented this into my games, though not as a stat. Basically I just have them take a Luck Roll occasionally. If they get a good result then, congrats! That goblin you just crited lost his arm, huzzah! Or if it's bad then, bummer dude. Your sword is totally stuck in the barbarian, make a strength check to pull it out. I find that, as long as the players know whats going on, then it can add some immediate spice to the game (especially if you're creative with it).

[big teej]

I have actually implemented this into my games, though not as a stat. Basically I just have them take a Luck Roll occasionally. If they get a good result then, congrats! That goblin you just crited lost his arm, huzzah! Or if it's bad then, bummer dude. Your sword is totally stuck in the barbarian, make a strength check to pull it out. I find that, as long as the players know whats going on, then it can add some immediate spice to the game (especially if you're creative with it).

would you consider it 'low impact'?

[Kelb_Panthera]

Here's an idea. Say you do add luck as a stat, with the commensurate increase on point buys. 1/day you can add your luck modifier to any 1 attack roll, save, skill or ability check as a luck bonus. Also, add a skill, keyed to luck, to the skill list called risk-taking. Make a risk-taking check as part of an attack roll, save, skill or ability check, if you succeed on the check you add your luck modifier to the attack roll, save, skill or ability check as a luck bonus. If you fail on the risk-taking check you instead take a penalty equal to your luck modifier.

If you make use of complete scoundrel
New Luck Feat: Lucky Bastard
Prereq: any luck feat
Benefit: when you use one of your luck feats to take a re-roll, you may make a risk-taking check. If you succeed you don't use-up the luck re-roll(s). If you fail, you instead lose twice the luck re-rolls that you would have used.
Normal: using a luck feat burns up 1 or more luck re-rolls, as described by the individual feat.

[WinceRind]

You must be joking...there are feats to allow you to:
Reroll init.
Treat a 1 on a save as a nat 20.
Ignore an attack that would otherwise kill you.

Sure, a lot of the other ones, like rerolling hits, tend to be a luck point sink, but luck feats are some of the most awesome defensive feats in the game.

Edit: Luck feats are in complete scoundrel.

Six stats is already too many, though. All you need are Brawn, Finesse, Resolve, Wits and Panache.

The few somewhat good ones tend to have prerequisites. And practically all of them have very limited capabilities, and can be used only once per day or similarly small amount of times.

I don't remember rolling a 1 in I don't know how many rolls I've made in the past year... And wasting 1, or in case of Luck feats with prerequisites, more then 1, out of default 7 feats on it seems a bit lacklustre. You will not get benefit from it, practically ever, and the feats themselves have rather dubious flavour that rarely works well with my characters.

"Hi, I'm McBig the barbarian, and after this drawn-out montage I have gained the ability to hit really hard at the expense of some accuracy"
"Hi, I'm Wits the Wizard, and after years of study/ sudden amazing discovery, I have learned to manipulate the powers of arcane to Twin my spells!"
"Hi, I'm Lucky, the rogue. I have learned to be slightly luckier in very specific situations and only a very limited number of times."

I'm sorry, but it's really what it seems like to me.

[Dusk Eclipse]

Like others have said, I say make it a skill dependent on everyone's favorite dump stat, Charisma. It will add some variance to the game, which *can* be neat. It might also let you avoid DM Fiat. Rather than just railroading someone to fall into a plot convenient hole or find some MacGuffin, have everyone make a Luck roll. If you ever randomly to see who gets ambushed or whatever, that seems like a great place to utilize Luck.

You could also just make it run off of Charisma alone. You ever notice that the really charismatic people in movies or games are always having fortune fall in their favor. Think of Han Solo or Nathan Drake: how often did force of personality or sheer blind, stupid luck save their hides?

I wouldn't add it as a stat because it can really screw with some characters who are MAD.

Curiously enough, to the best of my knowledge Charisma, the dump stat by excellence, is the stat that is easiest to use stuff other than the normal charisma uses (for example IIRC there are at least 3 or more ways to get Cha to AC) while I only know of 1 for int (and requires monk levels

[Kelb_Panthera]

The few somewhat good ones tend to have prerequisites. And practically all of them have very limited capabilities, and can be used only once per day or similarly small amount of times.

I don't remember rolling a 1 in I don't know how many rolls I've made in the past year... And wasting 1, or in case of Luck feats with prerequisites, more then 1, out of default 7 feats on it seems a bit lacklustre. You will not get benefit from it, practically ever, and the feats themselves have rather dubious flavour that rarely works well with my characters.

"Hi, I'm McBig the barbarian, and after this drawn-out montage I have gained the ability to hit really hard at the expense of some accuracy"
"Hi, I'm Wits the Wizard, and after years of study/ sudden amazing discovery, I have learned to manipulate the powers of arcane to Twin my spells!"
"Hi, I'm Lucky, the rogue. I have learned to be slightly luckier in very specific situations and only a very limited number of times."

I'm sorry, but it's really what it seems like to me.

The thing about luck feats is that, individually, they're not much, but when you gather several up in the same character they become significant.

Let's take a human bard 5/fortune's friend 4 with lucky start, sly fortune, unbelievable luck, tempting fate, fortuitous strike, dumb luck, and make your own luck. You've got 9 rerolls to power these feats, and several luck oriented class features.

Here's one possibility: say you don't like doing poorly on initiative, so anytime you roll a 5 on initiative you use one of your rerolls. With 9 to use in a day and only 5 encounters in the average adventuring day, that shouldn't be a problem. Normally you'd have a 25% chance to roll <5, but thanks to your build's ability to reroll you only have a 6.25% chance to roll <5. You could do the exact thing thing with skill checks, some attack rolls, and several other rolls. Luck feats really can do a wonderful job of making a character seem just plain luckier than those around him.

[grimbold]

i would need to see a table of how this luck is balanced before making any judgements
but have you tried the fatespinner from complete arcane?
he is luck-based

[Eloel]

I'm really tempted to homebrew a base class based on Luck feats and Luck rerolls right now. Too bad I'm away from my CSco though.