True Strike + Disarm attempt = Cheese?

[ThomasBJJ]

First of all is this rules legal?

1st level Spellcaster casts True Strike on himself, next round he takes a 5' step and attacks with his quarterstaff in an attempt to disarm a 5th level fighter with a long sword.

Second, is this a "cheesy" combo that goes against the spirit of the True Strike spell rules? The current DM of our game seems to think so.

 

[ThomasBJJ]

Just to clarify, the spellcaster would be using his +20 to one attack roll for the disarm. Say that the spellcaster rolls a 12, the 5th level fighter now needs to beat a 32 (12 roll +20 true strike) on his opposed attack roll to prevent being disarmed?

 

[Olive]

First of all is this rules legal?

1st level Spellcaster casts True Strike on himself, next round he takes a 5' step and attacks with his quarterstaff in an attempt to disarm a 5th level fighter with a long sword.

Second, is this a "cheesy" combo that goes against the spirit of the True Strike spell rules? The current DM of our game seems to think so.

1) Yes I think so. true strike give you the +20 on your next attack roll. To disarm, you make opposed attack rolls. Remember that assumign the spellcaster doesn't have imporved disarm, then the 5th level fighter gets an attack of opportunity against the 1st level spellcaster, which given the spell is a wiz/sor spell means that the caster is likely to have 4 hp and a 12 AC at best is dangerous.

2) Cheesy? No way. It makes perfect sense to use true strike for grapples or disarms or other such combat maneuvers. And the danger level makes it a ballsy move IMHO.

 

[MarauderX]

Olive is right on... and I would give extra XP for using the true strike in a cool -if not dangerous- way.

 

[Hypersmurf]

My personal belief is that you would also count the defending opposed attack roll in a Disarm attempt as the "next single attack roll", where applicable.

In other words - if someone casts True Strike, and you make the Spellcraft check and realise what they've done, then on your action, step forward and attempt to Disarm them.

They make an opposed attack roll to defend against the Disarm attempt - it's the "next single attack roll" since they cast the spell, so True Strike triggers. You almost certainly fail to Disarm them, but their True Strike is discharged, and they can't do whatever it was they had planned on their next action...

Others disagree.

-Hyp.

 

[Olive]

Others disagree.

-Hyp.

it makes sense to me in this terminology laiden game. What does the sage say?

 

[Derrick Reeves]

My personal belief is that you would also count the defending opposed attack roll in a Disarm attempt as the "next single attack roll", where applicable.

In other words - if someone casts True Strike, and you make the Spellcraft check and realise what they've done, then on your action, step forward and attempt to Disarm them.

Unless you have Improved Disarm, their "next single attack roll" will probably be an AoO on you. This may or may not be acceptable.

They make an opposed attack roll to defend against the Disarm attempt - it's the "next single attack roll" since they cast the spell, so True Strike triggers. You almost certainly fail to Disarm them, but their True Strike is discharged, and they can't do whatever it was they had planned on their next action...

True enough. Of course, reach weapons and/or buddies will tend to limit the effectiveness of doing this.

True Strike is a really great Fighter/Wizard spell, with its lack of Somatic components and the opportunities for auto-disarm.

- Derrick

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

Yep, good use of True Strike.

Though one of my favorite uses of the spell is for True Striking Acid Arrows when attacking spellcasters.

Or for the rogue/diviner with a bow or crossbow, to make sure that first sneak attack hits (requires that you have a surprise round and win initiative).

 

[kramis]

melee isn't one swing

Of course the whole issue is more complicated when you take into account that D&D melee isn't one swing for one role ... it's a series of maneuvers that gives you one "opportunity" (ignoring ranged attacks which makes the whole thing even weirder). This makes it a bit harder to understand in any more specific sense what True Strike is doing.

I would personally allow it to be use in Disarm attempts, the touch attack for grapples and trip attacks, and other similar uses.

I would not allow it to be canceled out if someone tried to Disarm you before you got a chance to use it, but that's just a personal ruling and I see nothing wrong with letting the Disarm attempt "use up" the True Strike. To me it feels against the spirit of the spell (and avoid problems with what happens when you try to disarm an archer since there is no opposed attack role in that case), but like I said that's just my personal ruling. This seems to work fine in my campaign. The other way does have some appeal though ... makes spellcraft a bit cooler sometimes, and can even be a motivation for a fighter to take some levels in spellcraft (since all fighter class skills suck anyway).

 

[comrade raoul]

...And it's just fantastic for bladesingers, who can cast it as a free action at 6th level.