Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="FrogReaver" data-source="post: 9778246" data-attributes="member: 6795602">The case against advantage. The target of true strike is self. Under the spell targeting rules it says ‘a typical spell requires one or more targets to be affected by the spells magic.’  Thus the one being effected by the magic of true strike is the caster and not the target of the weapon attack. In the effect section of true strike it says you make one attack with a weapon. Making an attack with a weapon means the attack roll is of the weapon and not of the spell. Also, under the effects section of spells it says the details present exactly what the spell does.Attack rolls of spells are calculated by default as using your spell casting ability modifier for hit and damage.  If true strike really was a spell attack it wouldn’t need to specify to use casting stat instead of str/dex, it would do so by default. The case for advantage This seems to hinge on claiming that any attack in the spell effect results in an ‘attack roll of the spell’. But we have numerous examples where this is agreed to not hold.  Further, if exceptions are made for other spells due to non-explicit ‘of the spell vs not of the spell wording’ there is no good reason an exception due to the wording of true strike isn’t being made here.I know which case seems more persuasive to me.</blockquote>