Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 7968387" data-attributes="member: 18">That's Sage Advice though, getting the rules wrong and making bad suggestions the very first issue of Dragon I bought. I can't remember what it was but little eleven-year-old me was reading Dragon and basically got a &quot;?!&quot; above my head as I read Sage Advice and was like &quot;What the heck, this grown-up doesn't know the rules!&quot;. Crawford is easy the best, or to put it another way, &quot;least worst&quot; Sage but ooof he sure does mess it up from time to time Also none of it is binding unless you're playing AL. It's just suggestions. I get a little annoyed when he joking-not-joking accuses people of &quot;ignoring the rules&quot; in ignoring his suggestions, because mate, those aren't the rules. They're your opinion, which is not always well-considered, and is highly inconsistent when it comes to literal-ness. Like, in this case he's being literal to the point of being dense, but for other stuff he often has a very non-literal interpretation.Also, RAW, I think the OP knows this, but you have to hit two different targets for this to even be of benefit, as True Strike only works on the first attack against a target. Which just makes the whole thing incredibly corner-case. Even with non-twinned Fire Bolt vs twinned True Strike, you're barely getting ahead in this corner-case scenario. It's basically a draw, but you used more resources with True Strike because you paid to twin it.Is there really no scenario in which True Strike doesn't suck? One of the players in my Dragonlords group was trying to tell me that it made sense to cast it before casting a slot-based spell, and I'm like &quot;But it doesn't...&quot; - even the situation he was doing it in, if he'd used a cantrip the round before, on average he'd have done more damage. I guess maybe if you're going up against someone with a very high AC with a ranged spell attack.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ruin Explorer, post: 7968387, member: 18"] That's Sage Advice though, getting the rules wrong and making bad suggestions the very first issue of Dragon I bought. I can't remember what it was but little eleven-year-old me was reading Dragon and basically got a "?!" above my head as I read Sage Advice and was like "What the heck, this grown-up doesn't know the rules!". Crawford is easy the best, or to put it another way, "least worst" Sage but ooof he sure does mess it up from time to time Also none of it is binding unless you're playing AL. It's just suggestions. I get a little annoyed when he joking-not-joking accuses people of "ignoring the rules" in ignoring his suggestions, because mate, those aren't the rules. They're your opinion, which is not always well-considered, and is highly inconsistent when it comes to literal-ness. Like, in this case he's being literal to the point of being dense, but for other stuff he often has a very non-literal interpretation. Also, RAW, I think the OP knows this, but you have to hit two different targets for this to even be of benefit, as True Strike only works on the first attack against a target. Which just makes the whole thing incredibly corner-case. Even with non-twinned Fire Bolt vs twinned True Strike, you're barely getting ahead in this corner-case scenario. It's basically a draw, but you used more resources with True Strike because you paid to twin it. Is there really no scenario in which True Strike doesn't suck? One of the players in my Dragonlords group was trying to tell me that it made sense to cast it before casting a slot-based spell, and I'm like "But it doesn't..." - even the situation he was doing it in, if he'd used a cantrip the round before, on average he'd have done more damage. I guess maybe if you're going up against someone with a very high AC with a ranged spell attack. [/QUOTE]

Verification