| Post/Author/DateTime | Post |
|---|---|
| #1James_the_TrueAug 13, 2014 18:40:59 | Specifically do the Enhance Ability spell and the Rogue's Reliable Talent feature work on attack rolls? |
| #2tallric_kruushAug 13, 2014 19:07:25 | No, attacks will not benefit from that spell or feature. Ability Checks are skill checks, ability contests and the like. Attacks will always be called such, referred to as "Attack" in the rules.
The "Ability (skill)" checks benefitted by Rogue Talent would be rolled with advantage, if you were affected by that spell. In that case, you would be even more likely to succeed on those checks. |
| #3James_the_TrueAug 13, 2014 19:07:41 | That's what I was thinking too. So the Enhance Ability spells aren't quite as useful as in 3E. |
| #4PolarisAug 13, 2014 19:15:48 | Agreed. Attacks are attacks and have their own special rules (such as a 1 is always a miss, and a 20 is always a hit and crit). By contrast ability checks use slighly different rules. Not only that but attacks can depend on a variety of different abilities (usually Str or Dex but not always) while ability checks generally depend on the specific ability.
So, no I'd have to agree with the posters above: it wouldn't count.
-Polaris |
| (Reply to #3)tallric_kruush |
|
| #6nightwalker450Aug 13, 2014 22:48:09 | Also note from everything I've read saves are also a specific check. So the three types would be attack, ability/skill, and saves... Are ability and skill always part of the same set, such that jack of all trades would apply in opposed ability checks? If not what is the division point? |
| #7GrazelAug 14, 2014 10:21:48 |
|
| #8nightwalker450Aug 14, 2014 12:22:00 | Attack Roll, Save, Skill Check, Ability Check then are the 4 types.. But carries with it the caveat that if any player convinces the DM that for the Ability check they should be able to apply x skill proficiency, the bard will get Jack of All Trades as well. Sounds fair enough.
Only have the basic rules with me here at work (slacker me...) but going off of the last paragraph on page 58:
|