True Strike: Yes, lets beat the dead horse

MarkB · Apr 11, 2019

Bitbrain said:
I once cast haste on an enemy vampire, then cast a quickened true strike, causing me to lose concentration on haste and prevent the vampire from taking any actions that entire round.

First, Haste only affects willing creatures. Why would an enemy be willing to let you do this to it?

Second, you don't need to do anything special in order to lose concentration deliberately. You can stop concentrating on a spell at any time, even outside your turn, no action required.

5ekyu · Apr 11, 2019

MiraMels said:
Granted, I could easily also gain advantage by asking an ally within 5 feet of the target to take the Help action, but that would mean the fighter is giving up an entire round of attacks.

Why couldn't true strike be used with a concentration spell? I don't understand why you think that it couldn't.

Becsuse true strike is itself a concentration spell that provides no benefits until your turn after the one it is cast in.

cbwjm · Apr 11, 2019

5ekyu said:
Becsuse true strike is itself a concentration spell that provides no benefits until your turn after the one it is cast in.

I think that's the main problem I have with the spell, it's effects don't activate until your next turn. I'd much prefer it being "Your next attack before the end of your next turn." That way, I could see an eldritch knight who desperately needs to get a hit in using it with war magic. Although as I write this, since they could just make two attacks anyway by the time they have war magic, i'd say it would be better to just attack twice. I think I'm just going to stick to my SCAG cantrip version of the spell.

MiraMels · Apr 11, 2019

5ekyu said:
Because true strike is itself a concentration spell that provides no benefits until your turn after the one it is cast in.

Right, so you cast it, and you concentrate on it, and you hold your concentration, and your next turn comes around, and you cast, say, ray of enfeeblement on the target that true strike is focused on... and you're saying you don't have advantage on the attack roll?

I've gone back and read through the relevant rules and spell entries, and i'm not certain that I agree with that interpretation. Of course you'd have advantage on the attack roll. But, even if that literally how the rules are meant to be interpreted... surely that's an easy enough change to make?

5ekyu · Apr 11, 2019

MiraMels said:
Right, so you cast it, and you concentrate on it, and you hold your concentration, and your next turn comes around, and you cast, say, ray of enfeeblement on the target that true strike is focused on... and you're saying you don't have advantage on the attack roll?

I've gone back and read through the relevant rules and spell entries, and i'm not certain that I agree with that interpretation. Of course you'd have advantage on the attack roll. But, even if that literally how the rules are meant to be interpreted... surely that's an easy enough change to make?

Hey, there are a gazillion changes one can make.

But you cannot make an attack roll advantaged with True Sttike unless it is " on" and you cannot make an attack roll with a concentration spell unless it is "on". Both cannot be on at the same time.

smbakeresq · Apr 11, 2019

The bigger issue is how a designer can look at the spell and not realized it sucked.

Bitbrain · Apr 12, 2019

MarkB said:
First, Haste only affects willing creatures. Why would an enemy be willing to let you do this to it?

Second, you don't need to do anything special in order to lose concentration deliberately. You can stop concentrating on a spell at any time, even outside your turn, no action required.

The vampire had been trying to manipulate my character into betraying the other party members for a couple of sessions. In-game, the vampire had erroneously concluded that my old sorcerer was the weakest emotional link in the party, and so tried to bring him over to the Cult of Orcus.
Unfortunately for him, my old Sorcerer made a successful Insight check, and realized what the vampire was trying to do. So, my old sorcerer pretended to go along with the vampire, and when the fight happened the undead creature (and most of the PCs) believed that my character had actually turned traitor . . . Until I immobilized the vampire.

*checks PHB*. Huh, your right. I've playing since 2016, and I never realized you could just drop concentration on the same turn that you cast the spell.

CleverNickName · Apr 12, 2019

I can see a few problems with True Strike. There are a number of ways to fix it, but most either turn it into an overpowered, must-have monstrosity, or render it utterly useless. This is what I would do. (My changes are underlined.)

True Strike
cantrip, divination
Casting Time: 1 action
Range: 30 feet
Components: S
Duration: Instantaneous
Classes: Bard, Sorcerer, Warlock, Wizard

Your magic grants you a brief insight into the target’s defenses, allowing you to attack with incredible accuracy. When you cast this spell on a target within range, you make one weapon attack against that creature as part of the spell. This attack is made with Advantage.

Is it perfect? Certainly not. But I think it's fairly balanced and useful.

MarkB · Apr 12, 2019

CleverNickName said:
I can see a few problems with True Strike. There are a number of ways to fix it, but most either turn it into an overpowered, must-have monstrosity, or render it utterly useless. This is what I would do. (My changes are underlined.)

True Strike
cantrip, divination
Casting Time: 1 action
Range: 30 feet
Components: S
Duration: Instantaneous
Classes: Bard, Sorcerer, Warlock, Wizard

Your magic grants you a brief insight into the target’s defenses, allowing you to attack with incredible accuracy. When you cast this spell on a target within range, you make one weapon attack against that creature as part of the spell. This attack is made with Advantage.

Is it perfect? Certainly not. But I think it's fairly balanced and useful.

For many dedicated spellcasters, making a weapon attack with advantage will barely average out at a higher chance to hit than making a spell attack without advantage - and will deal less damage than a cantrip.

5ekyu · Apr 12, 2019

MarkB said:
For many dedicated spellcasters, making a weapon attack with advantage will barely average out at a higher chance to hit than making a spell attack without advantage - and will deal less damage than a cantrip.

By 5th level, its definitely out to pasteur.