[PF] True strike question

[Bhaakon]

One of my PBP players used true strike on an attack and rolled a 1. I'm fairly certain that the automatic miss on a 1 rule beats the true strike bonus, but I want to make sure I'm not missing a FAQ, clarification, or errata before I give him the bad news.

[Tarnesh]

I concur. True strike gives "a +20 insight bonus", but if the dice roll was a one it does not matter how many bonuses you may stack, it remains a miss.

[Killer Angel]

I want to make sure I'm not missing a FAQ, clarification, or errata before I give him the bad news.

Go with the bad news. :smallwink:

[BlueInc]

I'm in said pbp game, and saw the natural one, though I'm not the one who rolled it.


Automatic Misses and Hits

A natural 1 (the d20 comes up 1) on an attack roll is always a miss. A natural 20 (the d20 comes up 20) is always a hit. A natural 20 is also a threat—a possible critical hit (see the attack action).

Sauce (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/gamemastering/combat#TOC-Attack-Roll).

QQQQ

[Larpus]

Also, I remember once seeing in one book that a 1 can be thought as -20, which is why it's always a miss. So now with Truestrike, that's the same as getting a 0 on the dice, it's better, but unless he has some high BAB+Str, he can't even pass the base 10 AC.

[Telonius]

Also, I remember once seeing in one book that a 1 can be thought as -20, which is why it's always a miss. So now with Truestrike, that's the same as getting a 0 on the dice, it's better, but unless he has some high BAB+Str, he can't even pass the base 10 AC.

It's an optional rule. 1 = -20, 20 = +10. Standard is, 1 automatically misses, 20 automatically hits. There's good points to both. On the one hand, Archibald Archerson, level-20 Ranger and sharpshoter extraordinaire, will miss the broad side of a barn once every 20 tries, according to the usual rules.

On the other hand, if you use the optional rule it's possible to buff your armor so high that you're practically untouchable. There's no possibility of that lucky hit taking you down. A sufficiently cranky Dwarven Defender could face down a whole army for an afternoon, and never get so much as a scratch. (Assuming they actually went up to attack him instead of doing the reasonable thing and walk briskly away).

[CTrees]

Also, I remember once seeing in one book that a 1 can be thought as -20, which is why it's always a miss.

This is a wonderful theory. At, like, level one. An epic, gestalt character with a +80 to hit is going to, well :smallconfused: to that suggestion.

Any idea what book that was from?

[Telonius]

This is a wonderful theory. At, like, level one. An epic, gestalt character with a +80 to hit is going to, well :smallconfused: to that suggestion.

Any idea what book that was from?

3.5 DMG, page 25. (Looks like I got my numbers wrong, it's 1 = -10, 20 = +10)

[Larpus]

3.5 DMG, page 25. (Looks like I got my numbers wrong, it's 1 = -10, 20 = +10)
Well reminded, that was the book.

Anyway, yeah, it's something that only truly works/makes sense on lvl1-20 "normal" game, but can be still be used as a general "a rolled 1 reduces your to-hit enough that it never hits and a rolled 20 adds enough so it always hit".

[Drachasor]

Well reminded, that was the book.

Anyway, yeah, it's something that only truly works/makes sense on lvl1-20 "normal" game, but can be still be used as a general "a rolled 1 reduces your to-hit enough that it never hits and a rolled 20 adds enough so it always hit".

I don't know about that. If we're talking about someone who can have all sorts of penalties (e.g. prone, etc) including really bad luck (a 2) and still hit something, then does making them miss on a 1 really make sense when those penalties aren't there? I'd argue not.