Buffing Bottom of the Barrel Spells (Cantrip-2nd)

[Kryx]

I'd like to create some ideas for how to buff spells that "most" consider to be underpowered.

I would ask that every poster please refrain from debating whether a spell is underpowered or not. It can be discussed with some objective sources (like guides), but please keep the arguing to a bare minimum. I would like this thread to be about creating and sharing ideas rather than arguing. Please do discuss how a fix could be improved or changed.

If you do not believe a spell to be underpowered then maybe suggest an option that makes it just slightly more powerful. Not all of the spells listed can be buffed without making another choice bad, but they'll be listed to consider at least.

For now I'm going to do spells Cantrip - 2nd level.

I'm using experience for my opinion for why some spells are underpowered, but guides provide an objective opinion. These are the guides that are used: Bard (http://community.wizards.com/forum/player-help/threads/4146291), Cleric (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?374604-The-Devout-and-the-Dead-a-guide-to-Clerics), Druid (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?397940-5e-Druid-Handbook-Land-amp-Moon), Paladin (http://community.wizards.com/forum/player-help/threads/4135276), Ranger (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?374666-Not-All-Who-Wander-are-Lost-A-Ranger-s-Guide), Sorcerer (http://community.wizards.com/forum/player-help/threads/4142906), Warlock (http://community.wizards.com/forum/player-help/threads/4133456), Wizard (http://community.wizards.com/forum/player-help/threads/4157906)

Cantrips

Dancing Lights - Bard, Sorcerer, Wizard. Light is a better choice.
True Strike - Bard, Sorcerer, Warlock, Wizard. It is not worth the action. Pretty much ever.

Level 1

Color Spray - Sorcerer, Wizard. Sleep is stronger.
Jump - Ranger, Sorcerer, Wizard. Too niche and Levitate is generally a better choice.
Longstrider - Bard, Ranger, Wizard. Decent movement buff, but not worth the slot.
Witch Bolt (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?418027-Witch-Bolt-(updated-6-2-15)) - Sorcerer, Warlock, Wizard. Generally considered to be a bad spell that is not worth the action.

Level 2

Blur - Sorcerer, Wizard. Mirror Image is just better. This could be decent without Concentration.
Detect Thoughts - Bard , Sorcerer, Warlock, Wizard
Cloud of Daggers - Bard, Sorcerer, Warlock, Wizard. This one I find a bit hard to call underpowered, but rated red on 2 deserves some buff discussion ideas for those who think it is. It is a very small area, but is auto damage.
Crown of Madness - Bard, Paladin, Sorcerer, Warlock, Wizard. You're spending a spell and action to control another action in a very limited way.
Continual Flame - Cleric, Wizard. "A spell for a torch?" Though it does work on Darkness
Enthrall - Bard, Warlock. Wisdom Save for disadvantage on a Wisdom Check? Seems very mediocre and barely worth the spell
Flame Blade (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?422113-Flame-Blade-Why-is-this-spell-so-bad) - Not considered a good choice on the Druid. Concentration is very easy to lose.
Locate Object - Bard, Cleric, Paladin, Ranger, Wizard. Very nice. Should maybe just be a ritual spell.
Magic Mouth - Bard, Wizard. Super situational.
Melf's Acid Arrow - Wizard. Damage sucks.
Ray of Enfeeblement - Warlock, Wizard. Con save to penalize Strength based attacker only slightly. Save every turn should be a harder CC.
Spider Climb - Warlock, Wizard. Too niche and you have access to levitate anyways.


Please share your suggested fixes for these items or others that you think are underpowered.

Again, please keep this a thread for discussion and actually creating things instead of arguing.


Solutions (google doc (https://docs.google.com/document/d/13cl7zbg75eMEoP9pkJTAZinhVlaDo1M38HYrIrzG-jw)). Simplified changes:

Cantrips

Dancing Lights - Combine Light + Dancing Lights. Light allows you to concentrate for the effects of Dancing Lights
True Strike - increase the duration to 1 minute (keep concentration). Change the target to Self (matches 3.X's simple self buff without a target). "On your next turn, you gain advantage on your first attack roll, provided that this spell hasn't ended." There are some other ideas on page 2-3.

Level 1

Color Spray - Change duration to 1 minute and allow an Int save at the end of the target's turn.
Jump - Combine with Longstrider to make Striding and Springing. Duration of an hour and allow multiple targets from longstrider.
Longstrider - Combine with Jump to make Striding and Springing. Duration of an hour and allow multiple targets from longstrider.
Witch Bolt - Add grapple. Range only breaks the spell at the end of your turn.

Level 2

Blur - Change duration to 10 minutes
Detect Thoughts - Leave alone. Situational, but good.
Cloud of Daggers - Increase area to 5 foot radius.
Crown of Madness - Allow the creature to move half speed before attacking. Allow multiple attacks like multiattack.
Continual Flame - Add the Ritual tag
Enthrall - If the target fails its wisdom save it is also charmed.
Flame Blade - Merge into Produce Flame - allows a melee attack
Locate Object - Add the Ritual tag
Magic Mouth - Move to 1st level
Melf's Acid Arrow - Add to Sorcerer List. Change primary and secondary damage to 5d4.
Ray of Enfeeblement - Change duration to 1 minute. Change wording: "On a hit, the target has disadvantage on ability checks, attack rolls, and saving throws that use Strength and deals only half damage with weapon attacks that use Strength until the spell ends."
Spider Climb - Move to 1st level

[Kryx]

Crown of Madness
Dralnu's Suggestion:

I'd change it so Crown of Madness forces the affected creature to make a melee OR ranged attack on an ally within ranged, and if not in range they spend their move action to try and get in range and attack. Then I'd require spending an action to maintain concentration. That way you're spending a spell + your actions to control your target's actions (so long as it keep failing its saving throws).

A simpler but lamer fix is just remove the action required to maintain concentration. I still wouldn't use it, but it wouldn't be obnoxiously bad.

Flame Blade
Remove concentration and reduce the duration to 1 minute. Thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?422113-Flame-Blade-Why-is-this-spell-so-bad)
It becomes a decent spell, but not amazing. The Druid would rarely want to wade into melee in humanoid form anyways.

Witch Bolt
Each subsequent round requires a bonus action instead of an action. Only breaks if you end your turn out of range. Thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?418027-Witch-Bolt-(updated-6-2-15)).
The spell goes from horrible to pretty good. It's like spiritual weapon a bit, but it requires concentration and to be within range. It will be hard to keep up with concentration and potentially having to provoke to stay within 30 feet.

[MrStabby]

I wouldn't mind a version of witchbolt that could stack with itself - cast as an action, bonus action to trigger extra damage but you can have multiple copies of the spell active at once and the bonus action triggers the extra damage on all of them. Might have to lower the damage die though to balance that.

[Shining Wrath]

Granting for the sake of argument these spells need to be stronger:

Dancing Lights: increase the duration to 2 minutes and double the range
True Strike: Make it a bonus action to cast (this may be too good)
Color Spray: Allow the caster to target only creatures of their choice, so you can stand behind the front line and blast only your enemies
Jump: increase duration
Longstrider: make it a cantrip, reduce the duration to one minute

[Morcleon]

Continual Flame: Add the (ritual) tag to the spell.

[Evilsliphell]

Clerics cantrip Resistance seems like there are better option when it comes to using an action

[rhouck]

I wouldn't mind a version of witchbolt that could stack with itself - cast as an action, bonus action to trigger extra damage but you can have multiple copies of the spell active at once and the bonus action triggers the extra damage on all of them. Might have to lower the damage die though to balance that.

Would there be a way to balance it by trying to up the damage each round, but you risk losing it all? E.g., first round you hit and do 1d12. Next round, you can either automatically do 1d12, OR roll to hit... if you hit again, you do 2d12. Round 3 you can then either automatically do 2d12, OR roll to hit again... if you hit again, you do 3d12. Etc. If at any time you miss, the entire spell fizzles... so basically it's a gamble but at least gives the caster some options besides "I do another 1d12 /yawn".

Though I've also just wondered if it could be fixed by changing how it works when cast at a higher level. Currently, it sucks to cast higher because it only affects initial damage, and not the recurring damage. What if it was changed to if you cast at 2nd level, it does 2d12 and you can automatically do 2d12 every subsequent round? And scale on up that way? It doesn't seem like it would be overpowered compared to, for example, Call Lightning, since it would be doing 3d12 every round (but required an attack roll) when cast as a 3rd level spell, whereas Call Lightning does 3d10 (but requires no attack roll and is AoE, although offers a save and the outdoor requirement).

[Pex]

Witch Bolt - have the continuing damage and range increase with spell slot used.

Wish - Have the listed example uses also be part of the safe casting.

[rhouck]

Dancing Lights -- would leave as-is. Many creative uses (it can appear to be a group of torches, so great as diversion, setting up ambushes, or being able to see enemies without them seeing you)
True Strike -- agree it's almost always horrific. Make it a bonus action? Or just change it so you can cast it on someone ELSE (e.g., you point at the rogue and he gains advantage on his next attack, or on the ranger trying to make an impossible shot from max longbow range)

Color Spray -- needs a longer duration. 1 round makes no sense compared to Sleep and the difficulty of targeting with a cone.
Longstrider -- I think it can be quite a decent buff if you use a grid and depending on your party makeup, plus it's no concentration. I would probably change it to a longer duration (maybe 8 hours?). Or allow it to affect more creatures by default (instead of 1+1/SL).

[Nifft]

Color Spray - Let it deal some Radiant damage, and the caster can pick two creatures in the cone who must each make an Intelligence save or go blind for 2 rounds. Higher slot = bigger cone, more damage, more blind creatures, and (maybe) longer duration.

Dancing Lights - Roll it into Light. There's no reason to have two different spells. You want light, you get light, and you can pick the details.

Flame Blade - This could also be a Cantrip. "Use your action to summon a blade of fire and make a melee attack. The blade lasts for one minute, or until you release your grasp on it to use your hand for something else, like casting a spell." -- a neat alternative for a two-weapon fighter who doesn't want War Caster, or who lacks access to Feats for whatever reason. Damage would have to scale like a Cantrip, somehow.

Longstrider - This spell always struck me as a class feature disguised as a spell. Not sure how to turn it back into a class feature -- make it a Ritual, like Find Familiar is now? Make it part of a Feat which you need to be a Ranger or Druid to take? Dunno.

[Dontdestroyme]

Blur is basically for EK I think. Disadvantage against you when you have 20 AC is pretty fly.

Jump is niche but it doesn't take concentration which is kind of cool.

I rly don't think detect thoughts needs a buff.

Everything that's bad for being situational should just stay at is. That's part of it I think.

Melf's acid arrow I've always wanted to be awesome but it's always sucked.

[Strill]

Why the heck is Detect Thoughts bad?

[TurboGhast]

I don't think Color Spray needs much to catch up to Sleep. Perhaps just have foes not meta-know exact positions while blind, or something else that is unintrusive to the spell's mechanics.

[SharkForce]

dancing lights: agree that folding it into light makes the most sense.
true strike: making it a bonus action makes it at least useful sometimes.

color spray: no good suggestions
jump: just make the duration longer. it's actually quite interesting because it doesn't require concentration, and being able to jump around like crazy for, say, an hour, would be pretty interesting.
Longstrider: is perfectly fine. people practically shrivel up and die when you suggest wearing heavy armour without having sufficient strength. this is the opposite of that penalty for an hour, and can even be used to actually negate that penalty. yeah, it isn't great at level 1, but sleep isn't great at level 10. that doesn't make it a bad spell, it just makes it a spell you want to use when your level 1 spell slots are no longer critically important combat resources.
Witch Bolt: just make the damage on later actions scale. the main problem is that on round 2, you're dealing slightly more than cantrip damage at levels 1-4, approximately cantrip damage adjusted for attack rolls from levels 5-10, and less than catrip damage at levels 11-20. just let the later rounds of damage scale.

Blur: let it work on others, still require concentration, let it scale in number of targets.
Detect Thoughts: what's wrong with detect thoughts? is there a superior spell at this level range for detecting thoughts that i'm unaware of? niche does not mean bad.
Cloud of Daggers: this one just depends on party composition. i've seen lots of people who love this spell.
Crown of Madness: i like the suggestion to give up your action to fully control the enemy's action. but then it probably isn't a crown of madness. so instead, my vote is to completely change it; they move in a random direction (if possible), attack a target in that direction (including inanimate objects if that's what they run into), and the crown spreads to their target. but now it probably needs to be a higher level.
Continual Flame: is perfectly fine. i mean, i preferred when it was continual light and didn't have a stupid expensive component cost, but this is basically your "i don't want to track how many torches we have" option. it doesn't need to be amazing.
Enthrall: yeah, this one's a real stinker. mechanically, i'd represent this as choosing a point and causing the targets to automatically fail perception checks that are not on a straight line towards that point (fluff, you're creating a magically distracting display of sparkly lights or something like that). the spell does not work to prevent perception of attacks on themselves or their allies, and is fully broken if they perceive such attacks.
Flame Blade: it isn't considered a good spell because you basically never want your druid to blow spells on melee combat. the whole point of melee combat is that it *doesn't* cost spells. fold it into produce flame.
Locate Object: is pretty much fine. it is situational. when that situation comes up, this spell is best in class and has no real competitors. about the only thing i might change is to explicitly allow an accurate depiction of the item in question to count as making the item "familiar" to you.
Magic Mouth: situational, but again, it does what it's supposed to do just fine.
Melf's Acid Arrow: if the only problem is that the numbers are not big enough, just make them bigger.
Ray of Enfeeblement: i can think of plenty of ways to make this better. most of them are not particularly fast to resolve. you could have it inflict the "heavily encumbered" status, which is pretty nasty (speed drops by 20 feet, disadvantage on ability checks, attack rolls, and saving throws that use str/dex/con, plus possible other consequences; i suspect most DMs would not allow flight, for example. also, maybe make it a strength saving throw).
Spider Climb: once upon a time, spider climb was a level 1 spell. i'm not sure if that would be enough to salvage spider climb, but it might help.

[Inevitability]

Let dancing lights create a whole bunch of tiny individual light orbs (not strong enough to illuminate something by themselves), which can combine to form four larger orbs (as per the original spell) or various other shapes, such as a humanoid figure, a few words, a moving image, and so on.

Basically, make it a cross between Minor Illusion and Light.

[Kryx]

I'm amazed my plea of no arguing actually worked! Thank you guys for contributing!

Now I don't mean to act as the arbiter and judge, but I'll try to gather up the suggestions and form my opinion on what is best. Please correct it with reasons for why something else is better if you think so.

Also keep in mind this is for cantrips through 2nd level spells. I'll make more threads for the later levels so keep spells like Wish until then please. :)

Cantrips
Dancing Lights
Suggestions: Increase duration + range, leave as is, roll into Light, lots of tiny orbs.
My concrete suggestion: Roll it into Light. In that case light keeps its duration of 1 hour, but if you use it to cast lights that dance in the distance you must concentrate on the spell. You can still move the lights as a bonus action as prescribed.

True Strike
Suggestions: Make it a bonus action
True Stike is available to Bard, Sorcerer, Warlock, and Wizard. Making it a bonus action would cause Two Handed Baldelocks to be infinitely superior to TWF bladelocks. Same thing for EK. This would make the spell sky blue for those classes and would invalidate other options. Allowing it to be cast on someone else as a touch would also make this a really great cantrip and expand the action economy for a lot of classes. So good that it would ideally be used every round on the archer that is next to the wizard. I don't think that's a good option. But I have no better suggestions.

Level 1
Color Spray
Suggestions: Ignore allies, increase duration, add damage and ignore allies.
The spell already focuses low hp character which makes this a great CC for mobs so I think the ignoring allies bit isn't needed. I agree that a longer duration would be good. Have them be blinded for 1 minute and have an Int save at the end of their turn.
My concrete suggestion: Increase duration of blind and give an Int save at the end of every turn.

Jump
Suggestions: Increase duration
I agree that the duration increase is a good idea. It should likely last 10 minutes (same as Levitate and Fly). Maybe 1 hour?. Maybe it should allow another creature per spell level like Longstrider does?
My concrete suggestion: Increase duration to 10 minutes (or an hour) and allow it to target more creatures per spell level.

Longstrider
Suggestions: Make it a cantrip and reduce duration, increase duration, make it a ritual, leave it alone.
I don't think this needs much. I agree with Sharkforce that speed nerfs/buffs are pretty good I think the spell cost is fine so cantrip and ritual are out the door. I think increasing the duration to 8 hours would be a good option. It's strong, but still consumes a slot. 4 would maybe be better, but no other spell has a a 4 hour duration.
My concrete suggestion: Increase duration to 8 hours.

Witch Bolt
Suggestions: Don't break until the end of your turn. Bonus action to use on the secondary rounds, increase range and damage per spell slot. Make damage on secondary actions scale.
I think a bonus action plink for 1d12 damage is at a pretty good balance factor. Making it scale to cantrip levels was discussed in that thread and I stand by what I said there: All 1st level spells struggle against cantrips. That's the nature of the system and shouldn't be fixed on an individual spell level. However I think having it use a bonus action for a small plink is a pretty good choice - especially against bosses you can get close to. It has a tradeoff of having to be in melee range.
My concrete suggestion: use the version I suggested above.

Level 2
Blur
Suggestions: It's pretty nice on EK, allow multiple targets.
Allowing other targets makes this spell only become useful to buff the party tank. It was this way in 3.X, but I'd like to see it useful to use on yourself as well. A duration increase would be a decent choice since it requires concentration - so you can cast it before combat. That would make it fairly decent for melee folk. Middle of the pack imo.
My concrete suggestion: Increase duration to 10 minutes.

Detect Thoughts
Niche, but useful. Don't touch.

Cloud of Daggers
No suggestions.
I think the spell is decent, but it doesn't compare to other 2nd level spells. Increasing the area to a 5 foot radius (3x3) would be all that is needed imo.
My concrete suggestion: Increase area to 5 foot radius.

Crown of Madness
Suggestions: Dralnu's suggestion of allowing move before attacking. Other suggestion of fully controlling their action and buffing its spell level.
I think Dralnu's suggestion is a good one, though keeping it melee matches Barbarian's Rage.
My concrete suggestion: Allow the creature to move up to half speed before it makes a melee attack against the nearest target. Also allow multiattack instead of just 1 melee attack.
It keeps the flavor of everyone trying to avoid the crazed melee mad man, but actually makes it useful. Allowing multiattack makes it significantly for those type of mobs.

Continual Flame
Suggestions: Change to a ritual, leave as is
The reason this spell is decent is that it allows you to use it on a shield. Kind of like light the cantrip.. ha. Changing it to a ritual would expand the number of classes who have access to it, but I'm not sure that is bad.
My concrete suggestion: Change to a ritual.

Enthrall
Suggestions: Change it to make the enemies focus on a point and have disadvantage to see anything but that direction.
This spell is just awful. I think it should be re-written to match Pathfinder's Enthrall (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic/all-spells/e/enthrall). I'll try to flesh this out later.

Flame Blade
Suggestions: Make it a cantrip
A cantrip is a good choice as long as you don't allow normal extra attacks. However c cantrip would be significantly worse if a caster does want to go in melee. It damage scaling is much worse. I really do like the cantrip idea, but that's basically removing the spell.
My concrete suggestion: Either fold it into produce flame and effectively remove the spell or remove concentration and decrease duration to 1 minute. I'm still unsure which is better.

Locate Object
Niche, but useful. Don't touch.

Magic Mouth
Niche, but useful. Though I don't think this is useful enough for a 2nd level spell. It should be reduced to 1st level imo.
My concrete suggestion: Make this a 1st level spell.

Melf's Acid Arrow
Suggestions: Increase Damage.
Scorching ray does an average of 6d6 = 21 if all hit or 12.6 if we assume a 60% hit chance (which is normal for that level)
Melfs does an average of 10 immediately and 5 at the end of the next turn for a total of 15 if hit. Or 9 with hit chance.
For a delayed damage spell the delayed damage should be higher.
4d4 + 4d4 = 10 + 10 = 20. 20*.6 + 10*.4 = 16 average damage. Higher damage for a delay until they attack seems fair.
My concrete suggestion: Change the secondary damage to 4d4 at the end of their next turn.

Ray of Enfeeblement
Suggestions: heavy Encumbered
I think this spell would actually be decent if you remove the concentration or the save. I think removing concentration makes the most sense. Maybe also give disadvantage on strength attacks to make the spell worthwhile?

Spider Climb
Suggestions: Reduce level to level 1
I agree that it would be more useful at 1st level when it doesn't have to compete with levitate. Adding a scaling targets/spell level would be good as well.
My concrete suggestion: Change the spell level to 1st level. Allow for 1 additional target per spell level.


Please consider this as a discussion aggregation, not a final version. I will do it again in a day or so based on further discussion.

Items that could use further discussion (the rest are pretty settled based on my suggestions above imo):

True Strike
Enthrall
Flame Blade (cantrip vs 2nd level spell)
Ray of Enfeeblement

[MrStabby]

I would actually be tempted to increase the power of jump as well - or possibly combine longstrider and jump into one spell that has both effects.

The boost from Jump is not really big enough to do many things you couldnt before. Yes, on occasion there will be some gaps and possibly it has a niche for rooftop chases but generally I find there are not too many environments where there are gaps you could jump with this that you couldn't without.

Possibly if DM can give advantage or surprise for jumping into combat or similar it might have more of a use.

[Kryx]

possibly combine longstrider and jump into one spell that has both effects.
This is a great idea. Jump is niche and combined it's still just good. I wonder what duration to use. 1 hour? Definitely not 8.

[Nifft]

I like the idea of combining Jump with another spell, but not really Longstrider, since IMHO Longstrider works really well as an all-day buff.

Hmm. Maybe... merge Jump and Spider Climb? (Logic: Spiders can Jump.)

That gives two interesting mobility options that have good synergy with each other, especially if you allow a Jump to land high up on a wall.

I think that the merged effect would still be valid as a 1st level single-target spell.

- - -

In terms of Flame Blade, IMHO the spell effect is intended to replace a weapon.

Replacing a weapon for 1 minute per casting is not an efficient use of a slot.

It should either be an all-day effect (8 hours), or it should be a Cantrip.

[Kryx]

Oooh, Spider Jump & Climb! It's interesting. Longstrider still feels a bit weak, but I guess 10 extra movement for 8 hours is a decent buff - especially at later levels.

Spider Jump & Climb (please suggest a better name)
Duration: 1 hour (no concentration)
Until the spell ends, one willing creature you touch has their jump distance tripled. The target also gains the ability to move up, down, and across vertical surfaces and upside down along ceilings, while leaving its hands free. The target also gains a climbing speed equal to its walking speed.


Flame Blade - I think you're right. It's meant to replace melee and a 2nd level spell isn't worth it. Make it part of produce flame. Done.

[Morcleon]

Oooh, Spider Jump & Climb! It's interesting. Longstrider still feels a bit weak, but I guess 10 extra movement for 8 hours is a decent buff - especially at later levels.

Spider Jump & Climb (please suggest a better name)
Duration: 1 hour (no concentration)
Until the spell ends, one willing creature you touch has their jump distance tripled. The target also gains the ability to move up, down, and across vertical surfaces and upside down along ceilings, while leaving its hands free. The target also gains a climbing speed equal to its walking speed.


Flame Blade - I think you're right. It's meant to replace melee and a 2nd level spell isn't worth it. Make it part of produce flame. Done.

I like that change for the spells. Maybe change the name to Aspect of the Spider?

[Nifft]

Oooh, Spider Jump & Climb! It's interesting. Longstrider still feels a bit weak, but I guess 10 extra movement for 8 hours is a decent buff - especially at later levels.

Spider Jump & Climb (please suggest a better name)
Spider Movement.

Spider Skitter.

Spider Stride.


Flame Blade - I think you're right. It's meant to replace melee and a 2nd level spell isn't worth it. Make it part of produce flame. Done. That's the Cantrip solution, which I think is fine.

[MrStabby]

Spider Movement.

Spider Skitter.

Spider Stride.

That's the Cantrip solution, which I think is fine.

Arachnoform

[Kryx]

Arachnoform
Technically it would be "forma aranea" in latin.

I think Aspect of the Spider is the best. Spider skitter was good too.

I've made a google doc (https://docs.google.com/document/d/13cl7zbg75eMEoP9pkJTAZinhVlaDo1M38HYrIrzG-jw) to store the final forms. It has some other spells at the bottom from my Sorcerer balancing out the damage types.

[Once a Fool]

True Strike:

Change its duration to Concentration, up to 1 minute.

Have it affect one attack every round while it is in effect.

It might seem strange to have concentration on a cantrip, but, given that the cost to recast it will be another action, I feel that it could work.

[SharkForce]

heavily encumbered already gives disadvantage to *all* attack rolls, strength-based or otherwise.

jump as part of longstrider immediately gives us springing and striding as a name... as in, boots of springing and striding. so i'd favour that instead, personally :P

but seriously, i think people are undervaluing the jump spell.

a str 20 character can jump 60 feet across with a running long jump and the jump spell. that's pretty crazy mobility. that same character can high jump 24 feet straight up (and can reach to an additional 1.5 times their height). again, this is pretty nuts.

and then consider there are ways to increase your jump further... thief rogues can increase jumping distance by their dex modifier. monks can just straight up double their jump. champions can increase their jumping distance by str modifier.

so a maxed champion fighter doing a running jump can cover up to 75 feet across or 39 feet up (plus reach 1.5 times their height), a thief with 10 strength can jump 45 feet across or 24 feet up (plus reach 1.5 times their height), and depending on how you count multipliers monks with 10 strength can jump 60 feet across or 40 feet across, and 12 or 18 feet up (plus reach 1.5 times their height).

and if you give the monk or rogue gauntlets of ogre power, the jumping can get quite silly. (it also gets quite silly with girdles of giant strength or level 20 barbarians, but those are probably too rare to be a significant factor. on the other hand, there are also some animals that can make some pretty impressive leaps, and this spell can enhance them as well if you have them as companions).

and this is all without making any athletics checks at all. DM's discretion sets the DC on further jumps than that, but really, i think people are underselling the effectiveness of the jump spell. it really is a pretty crazy mobility boost. you can potentially even boost the range further for horizontal jumps if your DM is generous with interpreting feather fall.

regarding enthrall: my suggestion was not disadvantage on perception checks outside of the line they're looking along. it was automatic failure of perception checks except along that line. as in, all their attention is focused on that thing, and imminent harm is the only thing that penetrates their fascination.

in essence, if you cast the spell and it works on all targets, unless you walk right in front of them or attack them, they just are not going to notice you, at all.

[Dralnu]

I was browsing Treantmonk's guide (https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ZHzEjiHvtDItZE2ixfoYwqi7brTO-ag8uBJndE5saro/edit) and he labeled Immolation (EE) brown.

It's a 5th lvl spell, deals 7d6 fire damage on a failed save or half if successful. Concentration. On a failed save, the target burns, repeating its saving throw at the end of each turn, taking 3d6 fire damage if it fails and ending the spell if it saves.

I'm finding it difficult to compare this to other spells since I can't find a single target damage spell that requires a save. But if you shoot a 5th level Fireball it's 10d6 damage, which is equivalent to Immolation's damage over two rounds if the target failed its save twice. But fireball also has a 20ft radius and this is strictly single target + requires Concentration.

Pretty sure it would need a damage increase to be playable. Possibly 11d6 initial fire damage, 5d6 burning, keep the Concentration requirement. I raised it by 50% and rounded up.

EDIT: Oops! Didn't notice the "up to level 2" part. Ignore for now.

[Kryx]

It's a 5th lvl spell
If you wouldn't mind I'd prefer to focus on cantrips through 2nd level so the thread doesn't go all over the place. :)

I'll reference back to this when I do that set though.

[Kryx]

heavily encumbered already gives disadvantage to *all* attack rolls, strength-based or otherwise.
The problem with heavy encumbrance is that I now have to lookup what it does. Beyond that the flavor of Ray of Enfeeblement is Strength and Strength only so I'd suggest not going that route.


jump as part of longstrider immediately gives us springing and striding as a name... as in, boots of springing and striding. so i'd favour that instead, personally :P
Which is why I initially favored it as well. The problem is the duration. Striding and Springing at 8 hours is too long imo. It would have to be 1 hour. I think Striding and Springing is a more historical choice and Spider Climb should indeed be its own thing again (at 1st level).


regarding enthrall: my suggestion was not disadvantage on perception checks outside of the line they're looking along. it was automatic failure of perception checks except along that line. as in, all their attention is focused on that thing, and imminent harm is the only thing that penetrates their fascination.

in essence, if you cast the spell and it works on all targets, unless you walk right in front of them or attack them, they just are not going to notice you, at all.
Ah, slight difference. Absolute failure vs disadvantage. My bad on the reading.

I still think perception is entirely the wrong flavor. Enthrall in 3.X is supposed to distract and captivate - from the speaker, not from a random spot. I'll try to write up how I think the flavor works best in 5e a bit later, but I don't think perception is it.

[SharkForce]

longstrider + jump for an hour should be lots.

and my idea for ray of enfeeblement *is* hitting your strength. specifically, you're conceptually reducing their strength so low that no matter how little they're carrying (even if it is only their own body), they are heavily encumbered. setting it to a specific number (5 in 2nd AD&D) or to reducing by a certain amount (1d8 + 1 per two levels, i think) both require too much recalculating to fit into 5th edition.

heavily encumbered, well, yeah you have to look it up... but that's true for anything. if you want, you could just copy the heavily encumbered rules right into the spell, but most spells that inflict a status condition (stun, paralyze, unconscious, etc) already require you to look them up, so it isn't like that would be particularly different from other spells.

[Kryx]

and my idea for ray of enfeeblement *is* hitting your strength. specifically, you're conceptually reducing their strength so low that no matter how little they're carrying (even if it is only their own body), they are heavily encumbered. setting it to a specific number (5 in 2nd AD&D) or to reducing by a certain amount (1d8 + 1 per two levels, i think) both require too much recalculating to fit into 5th edition.

heavily encumbered, well, yeah you have to look it up... but that's true for anything. if you want, you could just copy the heavily encumbered rules right into the spell, but most spells that inflict a status condition (stun, paralyze, unconscious, etc) already require you to look them up, so it isn't like that would be particularly different from other spells.
Heavy encumbrance reduces the speed by 20ft. And disadvantage on all Str, Dex, and Con checks, attacks, and saves. That's way too much imo.

The best way to handle it imo is disadvantage on Str checks, attacks, and saves and half damage on strength attacks.


Spider Climb
Make 1st level. Add the following: "At Higher Levels. When you cast this spell using a spell slot of 2nd level or higher, you can target one additional creature for each slot level above 1st."

Striding and Springing
Same as Longstrider except
Duration: 1 hour
You touch a creature. The target’s speed increases by 10 feet until the spell ends. In addition, the target can jump three times their normal distance, though they can't jump farther than your remaining movement would allow.

[Kryx]

I've updated the OP with the summary of the changes that I've made. I made Enthrall also give the charmed condition if the creature fails. It's at least somewhat better now.
I have no good suggestions for True Strike. Any tuning seems to make it very OP.

I've addressed all other spells and think cantrip - 2nd level spells are pretty decent. Let me know if there are any others.


I'll start a thread for 3rd-5th level spells within the next few days.

[weaseldust]

Suggestion for True Strike: Same casting time, range, and duration. You point to a creature you can see within range; the first attack roll you make against it before the end of your next turn is made with advantage; further, if you hit with that attack roll, you score a critical hit.
This way the cantrip is worth spending an action for because if you hit you get (roughly) two actions' worth of damage.

Alternative: Same casting time, range of 300 feet, duration one minute (concentration). You name a creature within range that you know the location of; the first attack roll you make against that creature before the spell ends is made with advantage; once you attack, the spell ends early - immediately after you resolve the attack roll.
This way the cantrip is a situationally useful preparation for attacking a particular enemy. You might cast it while hiding from them, when preparing an ambush, when sniping, or just when you see them across a battlefield but can't reach them yet.

[Giant2005]

Have True Strike cast as a bonus action but also make the damage of the attack resisted.

[AvatarVecna]

Melf's acid arrow I've always wanted to be awesome but it's always sucked.

3.0 let you stack metamagic effects with themselves. My dad put together a character back in the day that, at about 9th lvl, could just wipe out whoever they were facing with the following combo:

Round 1) Haste, Extended Acid Arrow
Round 2) Double Extended Acid Arrow, Extended Acid Arrow
Round 3) Double Extended Acid Arrow, Acid Arrow

DM: It runs away
Dad: Yeah, but it's got another 46d6 acid damage coming. It's dead already, it's just still moving.

To keep on topic

I had a couple ideas for True Strike (you probably shouldn't use both):

1) Instead of a huge to-hit bonus, just have it not require an attack roll: your attack is automatically a critical hit.

2) True Strike applies to all attacks made in the next round the target attacks in (including any Extra Attacks, TWF attacks, cleave attacks, AoOs, etc).

[Mjolnirbear]

I'm actually not sure why True Strike as a bonus action being sky blue for bladelocks and EKs would be that bad.

Both have few options to increase their battle capability, magically speaking. EK in my circle is considered underpowered as is, and requiring a bonus action means it would conflict with other uses for bonus actions ordinarily considered very strong, such as GWM or Polearm Master or Crossbow Expert.

For Bladelock, at best they get 2 attacks. You need great skill to build an effective bladelock. Using it with Eldritch Blast means only one ray gets strengthened.

Using it with any other caster means youre not really worried about attacks. Cantrips do minimal damage and stacking it with non-cantrip spells uses up minimal spell slots.


But I'm no math guru and it could be crazy strong regardless. So make it a bonus action level one spell. You will be extremely limited in how much you cast it. A paladin just plain wouldn't, not at the cost of a 2d8 smite. At a certain point your level one slots will be fodder, but at that point you're competing with Mage Armor, Magic Missile, and for non-wizards, detect magic or identify.

[Giant2005]

I'm actually not sure why True Strike as a bonus action being sky blue for bladelocks and EKs would be that bad.

Both have few options to increase their battle capability, magically speaking. EK in my circle is considered underpowered as is, and requiring a bonus action means it would conflict with other uses for bonus actions ordinarily considered very strong, such as GWM or Polearm Master or Crossbow Expert.

For Bladelock, at best they get 2 attacks. You need great skill to build an effective bladelock. Using it with Eldritch Blast means only one ray gets strengthened.

Using it with any other caster means youre not really worried about attacks. Cantrips do minimal damage and stacking it with non-cantrip spells uses up minimal spell slots.


But I'm no math guru and it could be crazy strong regardless. So make it a bonus action level one spell. You will be extremely limited in how much you cast it. A paladin just plain wouldn't, not at the cost of a 2d8 smite. At a certain point your level one slots will be fodder, but at that point you're competing with Mage Armor, Magic Missile, and for non-wizards, detect magic or identify.

I think the issue is probably more about using it on a Rogue than any other class.

[Kryx]

Changing a spell from an awful spell to a sky blue/Gold rating isn't really ideal imo. It should be useful, but not the best spell on the list so that it is used every round in nearly all cases. I think an EK using true strike every round is pretty mundane. At that point True Strike becomes a mandatory cantrip for every melee based spellcaster.
True strike is meant for when you're having trouble hitting a creature or you really want an attack to hit for certain.

I think a Bonus Action is out the window due to TWF. It would make two handed fighting stronger in comparison than it already is.


My suggestion: increase the duration to 1 minute (keep concentration). Change the target to Self (matches 3.X's simple self buff without a target).

Now it would be usable before entering a door or other circumstance. You still have to concentrate and you still say the verbal spell component which announces your location to any enemies. Good, reliable spell for pre-combat. Still mediocre in combat, but that's how it's always been.
It does have a somewhat negative effect by spiking the first round of combat's damage, but I think the concentration and position identifier counteracts that.

Another option would be to take one of weaseldust's ideas and deal double damage on a hit keeping everything else the same.

[MrStabby]

An idea, one that I think people might not like:

Truestrike - next attack is made with advantage and adds caster modifier to to hit and damage rolls.

It is still not a good spell for things like eldritch knights who will have a better use for their action but it does begin to shine when you have a martial caster who puts a lot of resources into their spellcasting stat. I don't think I would begrudge this to an arcane trickster who seriously buffed intelligence.

[Kryx]

Truestrike - next attack is made with advantage and adds caster modifier to to hit and damage rolls.
Advantage + 2-5 to hit is basically an auto hit.

I don't think adding up to 5 on a hit fits with bounded accuracy.

[Mjolnirbear]

I think the issue is probably more about using it on a Rogue than any other class.

Have you found many rogues having a hard time getting sneak attack? Because attacking someone adjacent to an ally is not hard at all. And it would cost them their cunning action anyway, which can give them advantage in the form of Hide.

[Mjolnirbear]

Changing a spell from an awful spell to a sky blue/Gold rating isn't really ideal imo. It should be useful, but not the best spell on the list so that it is used every round in nearly all cases. I think an EK using true strike every round is pretty mundane. At that point True Strike becomes a mandatory cantrip for every melee based spellcaster.
True strike is meant for when you're having trouble hitting a creature or you really want an attack to hit for certain.

I think a Bonus Action is out the window due to TWF. It would make two handed fighting stronger in comparison than it already is.


Making it a level one spell would put a limit on how often you can use it. But as it stands, the only melee casters that get cantrips are EK, AT and Bladelock. To get it, you would need to multiclass (assuming it's allowed, which to be fair it probably is) or take a feat (in which case you are passing up several amazing feats and ability bonuses for a cantrip). Except for bladelock; and as i said, you have to put enormous effort and skill into making an effective bladelock. You become a bit more MAD, and this might actually make it easier to put together something that as an official class option should not require ecyclopedic knowledge of the game to make.

And EK, AT and Bladelock have limited spell slots. As a level one spell, it will hardly be all that abuseable.

And for regular casters, their best spells are save spells.

You say too powerful due to TWF. Why? You know TWF requires a bonus action, right? Even the ones granted by feats? I'm going to assume you meant GWF. In which case, limit it to one-handed weapons.


So. Make it a bonus action so it's useful. A level one spell so it is limited in scope. And cannot be used with attacks requiring two hands to avoid power attack chicanery.

[Kryx]

Making it a level one spell
Eh, no thx. It would have to change a lot for that.


You say too powerful due to TWF. Why? You know TWF requires a bonus action, right? Even the ones granted by feats? I'm going to assume you meant GWF. In which case, limit it to one-handed weapons.
Read up in the thread. TWF uses a bonus action. Making True Strike use a bonus action would make TWF worse in comparison to 2 handed fighting than it already is.


I think the best options are either make it buff before combat as I have or keep it an action and make the boost better (double damage).

[Mjolnirbear]

Read up in the thread. TWF uses a bonus action. Making True Strike use a bonus action would make TWF worse in comparison to 2 handed fighting than it already is.
).

Well thank you for the clarification. And yet if it were limited to one-handed attacks it would be better for neither gwf or for twf. The caster would need to balance the spell vs an attack, as all gishes do.

Doing double damage would be extremely risky for paladins and rogues. Doubling a sneak attack is strictly better than two attacks, because only one attack normally gets sneak damage. Paladins doubling a smite for free (if a cantrip, assuming mc or feat to get it) would be an insane prospect, effectively 4d8 for one spell slot.

Even basic weapon dice, it would greatly favour great weapons. 1d8 vs 1d12, not that bad. Adds up over time. But 2d8 vs 4d6 or 2d12? That's a bit more. What about small characters? They would miss out completely on heavy weapon damage.

Not to mention other riders an attack may have on it, such as duellist, divine favour or who knows what else. What if the person has a vorpal sword?

Plus auto hit *and* crit? For a cantrip? Ouch. Way too strong for a cantrip.

As a buff that lasts longer than a turn until triggered...it has possibilities. It can be great, and requiring concentration would make it competitive in the action economy, going up against spells like blur or haste or bless.

[pwykersotz]

As a note, if you combine Jump with either Spider Climb or Longstrider, you alter the Warlock invocation that allows them to do it at-will to themselves.

[SharkForce]

we could hearken back to 3.x and make true strike ignore concealment.

(also, i feel like some people are forgetting that the spell is true strike, not true strikes. you only get 1 attack boosted).

[weaseldust]

My suggestion: increase the duration to 1 minute (keep concentration). Change the target to Self (matches 3.X's simple self buff without a target).

Now it would be usable before entering a door or other circumstance. You still have to concentrate and you still say the verbal spell component which announces your location to any enemies. Good, reliable spell for pre-combat. Still mediocre in combat, but that's how it's always been.

I like this version too. I just wanted to note that the existing True Strike only has somatic components, and I think it's better that way, because it makes the spell more broadly useful. Picture the arcane trickster hiding behind a column, silently casting a minor buff, before they jump out to assassinate someone. Isn't that a nice, flavourful thing for the spell to be able to do?

[Kryx]

I like this version too. I just wanted to note that the existing True Strike only has somatic components, and I think it's better that way, because it makes the spell more broadly useful. Picture the arcane trickster hiding behind a column, silently casting a minor buff, before they jump out to assassinate someone. Isn't that a nice, flavourful thing for the spell to be able to do?
Right... When I made that post I for some reason thought Somatic was Verbal. Ignore the part about giving away a position. :smallredface:

I do think this is the most balanced useful version. The only consequence is the burst in the beginning of encounters, but it isn't so bad imo. Double damage, crit, and all that have a lot of balance problems.

[Easy_Lee]

True Strike
Bonus Action
Your next attack has advantage and ignores sources of disadvantage.

That would make it useful in many situations, and a viable choice on eldirtch knights and arcane tricksters. Since it's a bonus action, and doesn't actually increase the damage you deal or make you capable of anything you couldn't do already, it'd be a situational thing.

[Kryx]

Bonus Action
As one of the largest proponents of TWFers I'm surprised you would suggest a bonus action spell that would make a GWM EK or Bladelock stand significantly higher above a TWF EK or Bladelock.


Your next attack has advantage and ignores sources of disadvantage.
5e doesn't use the model of ignoring advantage anywhere that I've seen.


doesn't actually increase the damage you deal or make you capable of anything you couldn't do already, it'd be a situational thing.
It would be used nearly every round by a GWM EK or Bladelock. It would increase their DPR significantly. To hit goes from 60->84, 65->88, 70-> 91. That would increase damage by about 50% with 1 attack and somewhere around 30% for 2 attacks. Slightly less to account for GWM's bonus action usage.

[Easy_Lee]

As one of the largest proponents of TWFers I'm surprised you would suggest a bonus action spell that would make a GWM EK or Bladelock stand significantly higher above a TWF EK or Bladelock.


5e doesn't use the model of ignoring advantage anywhere that I've seen.


It would be used every round by a GWM EK or Bladelock. It would increase their DPR significantly. To hit goes from 60->84, 65->88, 70-> 91. That would increase damage by about 50% with 1 attack and somewhere around 30% for 2 attacks. That is not situational - that's literally every round for a GWM.

It enables nothing the character can't already do, the fact that it's a bonus action makes it actually usable, and ignoring disadvantage is a unique benefit. Just bonus action - ignore disadvantage might be good enough, and would fit them name "true strike." Your version was lame and provided a minute long benefit, something a cantrip shouldn't do with such a powerful effect as advantage.

The only reason you responded the way you did is because you don't like me. I tried to work this out with you via IMs, and you accused me of harassing you when I asked what your problem with me is.

[DracoKnight]

Flame Blade
Remove concentration and reduce the duration to 1 minute. Thread (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?422113-Flame-Blade-Why-is-this-spell-so-bad)
It becomes a decent spell, but not amazing. The Druid would rarely want to wade into melee in humanoid form anyways.

That's basically how it works at my table except it's not a Druid Spell. At my table it's a Wizard Evocation spell, for the Eldritch Knight :) It also scales +1d6 for every spell slot above 1st. (I dropped it to a 1st level spell) and can be used for bonus action attacks, opportunity attacks, and Extra Attack. It also finds itself on the Warlock spell list at my table.

[Kryx]

It enables nothing the character can't already do, the fact that it's a bonus action makes it actually usable
How can an EK or Bladelock gain advantage on one attack every round currently? I am unaware of them being able to do that.

They aren't. That would be a significant boost over what they can currently do.


Just bonus action - ignore disadvantage might be good enough, and would fit them name "true strike."
True strike is ensuring you're hitting, not necessarily ensuring you're not missing. They are similar, but the first has always been the flavor of True Strike.
And a Bonus Action is still bad for TWF. It speaks to the argument that TWF shouldn't require a bonus action in the first place, but that's not the default.


Your version was lame and provided a minute long benefit, something a cantrip shouldn't do with such a powerful effect as advantage.
It's exactly how True Strike the cantrip functioned in 3.5 and PF.

The only reason you responded the way you did is because you don't like me. I tried to work this out with you via IMs, and you accused me of harassing you when I asked what your problem with me is.
I've responded to every single person suggesting a bonus action in the same way: By saying it would unfairly benefit GWM.
I was indeed harassed by you several weeks ago and asked you to stop. In this reply I directly addressed your suggestions as I have for everyone else in the thread. I've pointed out the issues with that suggestion, nothing more.

That said I won't reply further to adhere to my "no arguing" statement in the OP. You've made your suggestion, I've pointed out why it would be unbalanced. No more for me to say.

[SharkForce]

As one of the largest proponents of TWFers I'm surprised you would suggest a bonus action spell that would make a GWM EK or Bladelock stand significantly higher above a TWF EK or Bladelock.


5e doesn't use the model of ignoring advantage anywhere that I've seen.


It would be used nearly every round by a GWM EK or Bladelock. It would increase their DPR significantly. To hit goes from 60->84, 65->88, 70-> 91. That would increase damage by about 50% with 1 attack and somewhere around 30% for 2 attacks. Slightly less to account for GWM's bonus action usage.

how can it increase DPR by 50% when it costs a bonus action (which could have been used to make an extra attack, which is kinda like having advantage except if both rolls are good you get extra damage), boosts a single attack, and 84% is clearly less than 1.5 * 60% in the first place and is the largest relative increase? whose DPR is it increasing by that much? someone who only has a single attack per round and doesn't have any good offensive uses for a bonus action? (honestly, i can't think who this is describing).

GWM EKs and bladelocks want to be using polearm mastery to gain a bonus action attack, and even if they don't, they're losing out on some bonus action attacks anyways because GWM does in fact grant bonus action attacks, just not as frequently as TWF.

all you're doing is providing a less stat-intensive option for your bonus action to increase damage. that sounds like if anything you're helping classes that are MAD, which describes bladelocks very well (not so much EKs though).

also, 5e does use the model of ignoring disadvantage, it just isn't always direct. when you use darkvision to see in darkness, you're ignoring disadvantage that would have been incurred from not seeing your target, for example. the most direct version i can think of, however, is in the rogue, though it is reversed. you can gain the ability for enemies to never have advantage to hit you.

but if you want other mechanics that don't (strictly speaking) ignore disadvantage but largely let you ignore the effects, consider the barbarian's ability to use their strength instead of their roll + modifiers for a strength check, or the rogue's ability to never use a roll lower than 10 on proficienct skills.

[weaseldust]

Whatever its effects on melee combatants works out to be, True Strike as a bonus action will significantly enhance bows and damage-dealing cantrips (if you cast True Strike with your bonus action, you can still cast Fire Bolt with your action). Their users can afford to expend their bonus action most turns for increased accuracy or to counter range or cover penalties. In particular, that means increasing the damage-per-round of all full casters who can get it, except at very high levels where they don't need cantrips so much. It will also allow anyone with True Strike to attack normally when blinded, restrained, poisoned, inside the area of a Darkness spell, or afflicted with multiple levels of exhaustion, making those effects much less impactful for PCs.

Besides, I don't think it suits either the fluff of the spell or the flow of the game to have characters casting it every round. It's meant to be preparation for a single attack that is very important or very difficult.

[Easy_Lee]

Whatever its effects on melee combatants works out to be, True Strike as a bonus action will significantly enhance bows and damage-dealing cantrips (if you cast True Strike with your bonus action, you can still cast Fire Bolt with your action). Their users can afford to expend their bonus action most turns for increased accuracy or to counter range or cover penalties. In particular, that means increasing the damage-per-round of all full casters who can get it, except at very high levels where they don't need cantrips so much. It will also allow anyone with True Strike to attack normally when blinded, restrained, poisoned, inside the area of a Darkness spell, or afflicted with multiple levels of exhaustion, making those effects much less impactful for PCs.

Besides, I don't think it suits either the fluff of the spell or the flow of the game to have characters casting it every round. It's meant to be preparation for a single attack that is very important or very difficult.

True Strike as an action is unworkable. You cast the spell when you want to do damage, but you have to spend your action dealing damage. Your action is a big deal in combat, and you can't give it up just so your next attack has a slightly higher chance to hit. The spell must not be a bonus action if it is to be useful as an effect applied to one attack. And if it lasts for more than one attack, it becomes too useful as something to just keep up at all times.

[Kryx]

how can it increase DPR by 50% when it costs a bonus action
GWM only has a bonus action to hit another target. For warlock that's around a 35% chance. At which point True strike is about 65% of it's DPR increase.

I'll give a direct example from my DPR of classes sheet: A level 7 bladelock does 24.1 DPR. His greatsword has a 35% chance to hit. With that chance to hit it does an average of 7.4 damage (including GWM -5/+10). With True Strike the first attack would have a 58% chance to hit. With that chance to hit his first attack does an average of 11.9 damage. Normally his hex does 2.8 average damage from 2 hits. That goes up to 3.6 with the higher hit chance.

So without True Strike his DPR is 24.1. With True Strike his DPR is 24.1+4.5+0.8= 29.4. That is a 21% increase. A bit lower than the 30% for two attacks that I said earlier.
If we account for GWM we multiple 5.3*.65 and the DPR is 27.545, or a 14% increase.





I don't think it suits either the fluff of the spell or the flow of the game to have characters casting it every round. It's meant to be preparation for a single attack that is very important or very difficult.
100% Agreed.

Others can choose their own version though. I'll post the most popular in the OP, but I would not recommend that style.

Boosting a melee attack every round would just set a new required Cantrip for every class that can take it. It would severely limit options instead of adding more. It literally works for everyone. Full Caster? True Strike to make sure you hit with that spell attack. Partial Caster? True Strike for significantly higher DPR.

[SharkForce]

Whatever its effects on melee combatants works out to be, True Strike as a bonus action will significantly enhance bows and damage-dealing cantrips (if you cast True Strike with your bonus action, you can still cast Fire Bolt with your action). Their users can afford to expend their bonus action most turns for increased accuracy or to counter range or cover penalties. In particular, that means increasing the damage-per-round of all full casters who can get it, except at very high levels where they don't need cantrips so much. It will also allow anyone with True Strike to attack normally when blinded, restrained, poisoned, inside the area of a Darkness spell, or afflicted with multiple levels of exhaustion, making those effects much less impactful for PCs.

Besides, I don't think it suits either the fluff of the spell or the flow of the game to have characters casting it every round. It's meant to be preparation for a single attack that is very important or very difficult.

conveniently, it requires concentration, which means that you probably aren't going to use it in the majority of situations, even if your plan for the round is to just firebolt.

but seriously, if you can afford to give up concentration to make your firebolt a bit better, whatever fight you're in is not a fight, it's your party stomping all over some poor unsuspecting monster(s). damage cantrips are for fights where you've already one, and if you've done that without needing to concentrate on anything better than true strike, the fight you're in was never going to be a challenge.

edit: true strike is concentration. so no hex. even if it wasn't, hex takes up your bonus action fairly regularly, so no true strike + hex combination.

but like i said, something in your math seems screwy. the spell is providing at best a ~50% better chance to hit. that should provide at best a ~50% increase to damage for one attack, except that it interferes with other bonus action options which needs to take it lower than that, because without the spell those bonus action options would be adding damage themselves.

[Once a Fool]

Some more True Strike options:

Replace the description with one of the following:

"You extend your hand and point a finger at a target in range. Your magic grants you a brief insight into the target's defenses. You gain advantage on your next attack roll against the target, provided that this spell hasn't ended. In addition, you may use a Bonus action to make a weapon attack after casting this spell, if you have not already taken a Bonus action this turn."

Or,

"You extend your hand and point a finger at a target in range. Your magic grants you a brief insight into the target's defenses. On your next turn, you gain advantage on your first attack roll against the target and that attack ignores any type of cover less than total cover, provided that this spell hasn't ended."

Or,

"Duration: Concentration, up to 1 minute. You extend your hand and point a finger at a target in range. Your magic grants you a brief insight into the target's defenses. On your next turn, you gain advantage on your first attack roll against the target and you may change any single damage die granted by the attack to its maximum value, provided that this spell hasn't ended. While the spell is in effect, for each subsequent round that passes before you make an attack, one additional damage die may be changed to its maximum calue, up to the maximum number of dice available. Your concentration on this spell ends if you ever can't see your target. While concentrating on this spell, you have disadvantage on all ability checks."

That last one has potential to be very nasty in the hands of an assassin, hence the restrictions.

The first one makes the spell cantrip-like, while preventing another spell from being cast (without Action Surge).

The middle one just gives its accuracy a little extra oomph. It's probably still not that great a choice.

[Kryx]

edit: true strike is concentration. so no hex. even if it wasn't, hex takes up your bonus action fairly regularly, so no true strike + hex combination.
Ocassional Bonus Action application is not really possible to model for DPR. Maybe it should be a percentage, but that's not really the point. You can play with the numbers on my DPR of Classes. I chose Warlock because it had the path for advantage done for truesight. It was easy to estimate a percentage increase.

Either way True Strike as a Bonus Action is a sizeable increase to DPR. Whether that is 10% or 50% doesn't really matter. Having it as an option to use every round increases the DPR and it becomes the prime choice and becomes necessary for every class. If you want that and to disadvantage TWF further then make it a bonus action. I think that is poor design.

Going to stop debating it though as I'd rather not ruin this thread for readers.




"You extend your hand and point a finger at a target in range. Your magic grants you a brief insight into the target's defenses. On your next turn, you gain advantage on your first attack roll against the target and that attack ignores any type of cover less than total cover, provided that this spell hasn't ended."
Pretty decent option. Usable in the cases where a target will have 3/4 cover next round.


"Duration: Concentration, up to 1 minute. You extend your hand and point a finger at a target in range. Your magic grants you a brief insight into the target's defenses. On your next turn, you gain advantage on your first attack roll against the target and you may change any single damage die granted by the attack to its maximum value, provided that this spell hasn't ended. While the spell is in effect, for each subsequent round that passes before you make an attack, one additional damage die may be changed to its maximum calue, up to the maximum number of dice available. Your concentration on this spell ends if you ever can't see your target. While concentrating on this spell, you have disadvantage on all ability checks."
If it lasts up to a minute I don't think it needs additional dice rerolls. I'd pick one or the other.

[Once a Fool]

If it lasts up to a minute I don't think it needs additional dice rerolls. I'd pick one or the other.

Actually, I think it would be a pretty good option with its original duration, too (and, hence, no extra dice-changing). I just wanted to provide a version that gets stronger by holding off on attacking. Also, note that they are not rerolls, but maximizations. I don't think a mere reroll would be worth the Action casting time.

[SharkForce]

what with getting only one special weapon and using bonus action for hex frequently, TWF is pretty much already ruined for bladelock. nothing about true strike is likely to change that no matter how we do it.

[MrStabby]

what with getting only one special weapon and using bonus action for hex frequently, TWF is pretty much already ruined for bladelock. nothing about true strike is likely to change that no matter how we do it.

Yeah, this is why I wouldn't mind something that uses the casting stat - a melee bonus that is significant if you have made an investment in spellcasting, if not then something more modest. Bladelocks could then be less MAD - by getting attack bonuses related to CHA and it would provide an more thematically aligned cantrip than eldritch blast. Likewise it could open up opportunities for more combat focussed other classes without it being mandatory for pure martials. As it could be picked up by magic initiate it could be open to a lot of people.

[Kryx]

TWF is pretty much already ruined for bladelock.
Not EK. Nor does it effect any of the spell casters.

If you want a mandatory cantrip in your game that's your choice. It is a poor design to have a mandatory cantrip for all casters imo.

[SharkForce]

it isn't mandatory. it buffs cantrip use for casters, and you don't use cantrips unless the fight is no longer important enough to spend resources on.

or, in other words... once you've basically got the fight won, true strike can be used to make the cleanup phase go a bit less slowly.

i can't say that i'm feeling terribly concerned about the impact.

[DracoKnight]

it isn't mandatory. it buffs cantrip use for casters, and you don't use cantrips unless the fight is no longer important enough to spend resources on.

or, in other words... once you've basically got the fight won, true strike can be used to make the cleanup phase go a bit less slowly.

i can't say that i'm feeling terribly concerned about the impact.

...Magic Initiate...Rogue. You get Sneak Attack when you have advantage on the attack roll (or various other conditions.) With this, you use your bonus action and you just SNEAK. ALL THE TIME.

EDIT: Admittedly, it does cost a feat, so it's a little bit less worrisome than the Swashbuckler, which sneaks all day even without meeting the conditions. :P

[Nifft]

True Strike
Divination Cantrip

Casting Time: 1 action
Range: Self
Components: S
Duration: Instantaneous

As part of casting this spell, you make a single special melee or ranged attack.

If you make a ranged attack:
- Add +1d4 to your attack roll.
- The defender does not gain a benefit to AC from half or three-quarters cover.
- If your attack is at long range, you do not suffer disadvantage.

If you make a melee attack:
- Add +1d4 to your attack roll.
- The defender does not gain a benefit to AC from half or three-quarters cover.
- If you attack an invisible target, you do not suffer disadvantage.

[EvilAnagram]

Hey, you used one of my guides!

The problem with both Jump and Longstrider is that they're both so situational and provide so little boost that they are never worth preparing, and they're absolutely not worth learning at all if you're a Ranger due to their limited spell availability. OP's Striding and Springing doesn't fix this.

[Steampunkette]

Alternate True Strike option.

Reaction cast on others. For self add the line: When you cast this spell as an action you may immediately use your bonus action to make a single attack with a readied weapon or unarmed strike.

[SharkForce]

...Magic Initiate...Rogue. You get Sneak Attack when you have advantage on the attack roll (or various other conditions.) With this, you use your bonus action and you just SNEAK. ALL THE TIME.

EDIT: Admittedly, it does cost a feat, so it's a little bit less worrisome than the Swashbuckler, which sneaks all day even without meeting the conditions. :P

what, you mean, just like they can do right now by spending a feat so that they can hide when lightly obscured (or without a feat if they're a lightfoot or in the right environment as a wood elf)? just so that they can do *worse* then they'd be able to do by just using two weapons, which also lets you roll twice, but allows you to deal extra damage if both hit? just like they'd be able to do with the crossbow expert feat and a hand crossbow except that they would get to add more damage?

the conditions for sneak attack are absurdly easy. all you need is to have an ally adjacent to your target. all this does is give the rogue *worse* options for making attacks than they already have. it is not a problem.


Hey, you used one of my guides!

The problem with both Jump and Longstrider is that they're both so situational and provide so little boost that they are never worth preparing, and they're absolutely not worth learning at all if you're a Ranger due to their limited spell availability. OP's Striding and Springing doesn't fix this.

i disagree. both are underrated. they're not a great use of a spell at level 1, but that doesn't mean they're not a great use of a spell. as i pointed out earlier, people freak out over the potential to lose 10 feet of movement from heavy armour, well, this is +10 movement. people get excited about wood elf having +5 feet of movement. this is twice as much as that. with longstrider, a dwarf can move just as fast as a wood elf. likewise, as i pointed out with jump, there really is a substantial movement increase. a strong individual can jump 60 foot gaps with no checks required, or jump over 20 feet high (basically, high enough to land on the roof of a two-story building. note that with medieval technology, 3 stories is basically the practical limit for stone buildings, so this gives insane mobility in a city).

it isn't worth your only spell slot at level 1. but it is definitely worth considering at level 10 to spend one or more spell slots on this for special occasions.

[EvilAnagram]

i disagree. both are underrated. they're not a great use of a spell at level 1, but that doesn't mean they're not a great use of a spell. as i pointed out earlier, people freak out over the potential to lose 10 feet of movement from heavy armour, well, this is +10 movement. people get excited about wood elf having +5 feet of movement. this is twice as much as that. with longstrider, a dwarf can move just as fast as a wood elf.
I think that the people who get overly excited about elf movement are a bit silly as well. I'm in a party with a monk, and his 40' movement rarely comes into play or makes him more capable in combat, and it certainly doesn't help him in overland travel.


likewise, as i pointed out with jump, there really is a substantial movement increase. a strong individual can jump 60 foot gaps with no checks required, or jump over 20 feet high (basically, high enough to land on the roof of a two-story building. note that with medieval technology, 3 stories is basically the practical limit for stone buildings, so this gives insane mobility in a city).
Jump is limited by your remaining movement. This is confirmed by Jeremy Crawford via Twitter. A strong individual cannot use Jump to clear a 60' gap. Most can't use it to clear a 40' gap. The 20' leap is a good point, but the characters running around on rooftops likely have a decent means of doing so without Jump.


it isn't worth your only spell slot at level 1. but it is definitely worth considering at level 10 to spend one or more spell slots on this for special occasions.
There simply aren't enough Ranger slots to ever justify Jump or Longstrider.

[SharkForce]

I think that the people who get overly excited about elf movement are a bit silly as well. I'm in a party with a monk, and his 40' movement rarely comes into play or makes him more capable in combat, and it certainly doesn't help him in overland travel.


Jump is limited by your remaining movement. This is confirmed by Jeremy Crawford via Twitter. A strong individual cannot use Jump to clear a 60' gap. Most can't use it to clear a 40' gap. The 20' leap is a good point, but the characters running around on rooftops likely have a decent means of doing so without Jump.


There simply aren't enough Ranger slots to ever justify Jump or Longstrider.

1) that has more to do with ranger being arbitrarily screwed over on not being able to swap around spells than it has to do with jump or longstrider, and the ranger arbitrarily getting vastly fewer spells known than anyone else (again, for no apparent reason).

2) rangers aren't the only class that gets those spells.

3) not entirely sure i'd agree with that assessment in the first place. i wouldn't grab it as my first spell. but by the time you're looking at the 11th spell, i'd say that a combined longstrider/jump is looking, if not amazing, at least more appealing than a lot of the other options they have, especially as a 1-hour no-concentration spell that can hit multiple targets.

4) dash. oh, hey look, now i've got 80 feet of movement available in this round. looks like i can jump a 60 foot gap after all.

5) especially on a class that probably focuses on kiting if you ever get stuck in a bad spot, being able to clear ridiculous obstacles and run faster than many enemies sounds like the opposite of being useless.

[EvilAnagram]

1) that has more to do with ranger being arbitrarily screwed over on not being able to swap around spells than it has to do with jump or longstrider, and the ranger arbitrarily getting vastly fewer spells known than anyone else (again, for no apparent reason).

2) rangers aren't the only class that gets those spells.
I was simply using Ranger as a specific example of a class that should never take these spells.


3) not entirely sure i'd agree with that assessment in the first place. i wouldn't grab it as my first spell. but by the time you're looking at the 11th spell, i'd say that a combined longstrider/jump is looking, if not amazing, at least more appealing than a lot of the other options they have, especially as a 1-hour no-concentration spell that can hit multiple targets.
I suppose if you were prepping for an encounter in which the party's ability to jump and run quickly were of paramount importance, and you had a large amount of preparation time, you could conceivably cast either Jump or Longstrider on everyone at the cost of all your first level slots. Outside of that specific situation which four people might ever encounter, those spells are not worth their slots.

Now, say we alter the spells, combining their effects and allowing the caster to cast them on the whole party for a single slot. It's still less reliable than Dimension Door. If the whole party needs to move like a monk, there's a good chance someone has a way around literally moving like a monk.


4) dash. oh, hey look, now i've got 80 feet of movement available in this round. looks like i can jump a 60 foot gap after all.
If you have to dedicate a full round to crossing a gap, why not go with any teleportation spell? Hell, that specific example only helps the subset of players with 20 Str. Most characters still won't be able to cross that gap with Jump.


5) especially on a class that probably focuses on kiting if you ever get stuck in a bad spot, being able to clear ridiculous obstacles and run faster than many enemies sounds like the opposite of being useless.
If your class is focused on kiting, and you have access to Longstrider and Jump, then you have better ways of escaping that situation. Wizards have half a dozen teleport options, not to mention Expeditious Retreat. Druids can change form, summon creatures to protect them, and alter their environment. Even combined, these spells aren't that useful compared to your other options.

[SharkForce]

teleportation spells last for 1 action and frequently can't target others to bring along with you. the new and improved striding and springing spell lasts for 1 hour and can be used on others.

you cannot get similar results with a dimension door. it isn't even close.

[Kryx]

Movement speed can be very nice. My monk definitely enjoys being able to move further. As SharkForce said I think Striding and Spinging becomes a pretty good option at later tiers. It's definitely worth considering depending on jump's usability in the environment. Even just the movement speed makes it worth casting fairly commonly at later levels imo.

Regarding Ranger - I agree with Shark here as well. It should have the same spellcasting system as a Paladin. Totally not within the topic of this thread though~



True Strike
Casting Time: 1 action
Duration: Instantaneous

As part of casting this spell, you make a single special melee or ranged attack.

- Add +1d4 to your attack roll.
- The defender does not gain a benefit to AC from half or three-quarters cover.
I really like the concept of this, but it has a few issues:

It is now the ideal option for level 1-4 where martials already shine fairly brightly. Or a straight buff to single attack classes like Wizard, Sorc(Non favored soul).
Melee and ranged should just be the same - bonus to attack and ignore cover imo.
Bonus instead of advantage makes it clunky. I think this was done for rogues. Arcane trickster could indeed pick this up and make a sneak attack every round if it was advantage though.
No longer works for spellcasters. This could be done by allowing a cantrip while treating yourself as half level for cantrip progression.

I think 2-4 can be massaged as I suggest and it's pretty good, but #1 is a problem.

[Nifft]

I really like the concept of this, but it has a few issues:

It is now the ideal option for level 1-4 where martials already shine fairly brightly
Martials means who? EK and AT? They don't get spells until level 3, so that's half your problem gone.




Melee and ranged should just be the same - bonus to attack and ignore cover imo.
Bonus instead of advantage makes it clunky. I think this was done for rogues. Arcane trickster could indeed pick this up and make a sneak attack every round if it was advantage though.
No longer works for spellcasters. This could be done by allowing a cantrip while treating yourself as half level for cantrip progression.

I think 2-4 can be massaged as I suggest and it's pretty good, but #1 is a problem.
Hmm.

Bonus instead of Advantage is because Advantage is pretty easy to get already, and bonuses are rare. This is the spell you cast when you're already flanking the bastard and you still can't hit.

Let's see, I think all of your issues can be fixed just by making it more Cantrip-like:

True Strike
Divination Cantrip

Casting Time: 1 action
Range: Self
Components: S
Duration: Instantaneous

As part of casting this spell, you make a single special melee or ranged attack.
- The defender does not gain a benefit to AC from half or three-quarters cover against this attack.
- This attack does not suffer Disadvantage from any environmental effect, including inability see the target due to heavily obscured vision, heavy wind, etc.
- If you are at least 5th level, you gain a +1 bonus to the attack roll. At 11th level, the bonus increases to +2. At 17th level, the bonus increases to +3.

[Kryx]

True Strike
Divination Cantrip

Casting Time: 1 action
Range: Self
Components: S
Duration: Instantaneous

As part of casting this spell, you make a single special melee or ranged attack.
- The defender does not gain a benefit to AC from half or three-quarters cover against this attack.
- This attack does not suffer Disadvantage from any environmental effect, including inability see the target due to heavily obscured vision, heavy wind, etc.
- If you are at least 5th level, you gain a +1 bonus to the attack roll. At 11th level, the bonus increases to +2. At 17th level, the bonus increases to +3.
This is really nice. Still doesn't work for spells, which some may like, but it'd be nice we could get that to work - even just cantrips. Maybe at half character level progression like I suggested before?

Ignoring Disadvantage is still strange to me. It does add some usability though. Maybe make it simpler: "This attack does not suffer Disadvantage".

[Nifft]

This is really nice. Still doesn't work for spells, which some may like, but it'd be nice we could get that to work - even just cantrips. Maybe at half character level progression like I suggested before?

Ignoring Disadvantage is still strange to me. It does add some usability though. Maybe make it simpler: "This attack does not suffer Disadvantage".

I'm trying to emulate the old version of True Strike, which negated concealment. Concealment doesn't exist in 5e, so I'm going with "environmental effects" instead.

The DMG says that imposing Disadvantage is generally what an Environmental obstacle will do, such as high winds vs. ranged attacks -- so the bonus is situational, but it's not going to be an uncommon situation (at least if the DM is using the DMG).

But I dunno about negating ALL Disadvantage -- that seems more than just situational.

[Kryx]

I'm trying to emulate the old version of True Strike, which negated concealment. Concealment doesn't exist in 5e, so I'm going with "environmental effects" instead.
I figured ignoring cover was what made up for concealment.

I think environmental Disadvantage is rare. My thought was to have True Strike as an better than nothing niche if the enemy is heavily covered or if you have disadvantage for some reason. But maybe you're right - ignoring things like Poisoned probably isn't ideal.

Any thoughts on the Cantrip part?

[Nifft]

I figured ignoring cover was what made up for concealment. That's part of it, but not all of it.


I think environmental Disadvantage is rare. We play in different games, I guess.

Heavy wind isn't rare outdoors, especially not in fun locations like: on a ship, on bridge across a mountain chasm, or approaching the druid-grove of the titan of thunder.

And that's just one environmental effect.


Any thoughts on the Cantrip part? I figure if you're a real spellcaster, and you don't use weapons, and you don't want to make an attack roll due to disadvantage, then you probably have options like "just make the whole area explode in fire".

Or they can use a cantrip which doesn't require an attack roll, like Poison Spray or Sacred Flame.

[Kryx]

I think you're right - it doesn't need to work on cantrips as there are other options like saves.

I'm going to use your version. I think it's much better than the default and not unbalanced.
I'll add it to the OP and also mention that other options were suggested on page 2-3.


EDIT: Reworded the description to match sharpshooter and cantrip scaling:
As part of casting this spell, you make a single melee or ranged attack. This attack ignores half cover and three-quarters cover. It also does not suffer Disadvantage from any environmental effect, including inability see the target due to heavily obscured vision, heavy wind, etc.
You gain a +1 bonus to the attack roll when you reach 5th level (+1), 11th level (+2), 17th level (+3).


Also: Thanks for reminding me of wind. I forget about it sometimes even though I have it written as a reminder in my houserules doc. It'll be useful for ship to ship combat in my Skull & Shackles game.

[Giant2005]

I'm going to use your version. I think it's much better than the default and not unbalanced.

It is pretty surprising that you would come to that conclusion considering it is significantly more powerful than other options which you vetoed for being unbalanced.

[Kryx]

It is pretty surprising that you would come to that conclusion considering it is significantly more powerful than other options which you vetoed for being unbalanced.
How is this option more unbalanced than the bonus attack suggestions?

It allows 1 attack instead of the normal attack progression. That is significantly weaker for all the classes that would use it.
It doesn't have advantage, but instead a slow scaling bonus. Again it's 1 hit so while normally a slow scaling bonus would break bounded accuracy you're trading away multiple hits and higher DPR for this 1 hit more likely hit.
It ignores half cover and three-quarters cover like sharpshooter does.
It can ignore some less common cases of disadvantage.

The use case for this is niche - you would want to use your main attacks in most cases except when you are a lot less likely to hit - which is exactly what True Strike has been since 3.X.
I think the Disadvantage ignore may be too much. Either way it would only be used in niche circumstances - that's not overpowered.


The Bonus Action suggestions are unabalanced for TWF, unbalanced for DPR, and require that every class that has it on their spell list to pick it up. Not only that but it entirely changed the fluff for True Strike that existed in 3.X and now in 5e. If it was better balanced, then sure, but the Bonus action suggestions put forward are not more balanced for the reasons I specified.

To actually refine my earlier discussion about GWM: It actually doesn't conflict at all with the bonus action from that. You would simply use your normal attack and then if it doesn't proc GWM you use your Bonus Action for True Strike. Literally every round that it doesn't proc you would use True Strike.

I have no intention of being rude so sorry if this comes off as confrontational. I respect your opinion so please do share where you specifically disagree.

[Giant2005]

I have no intention of being rude so sorry if this comes off as confrontational - Please do share where you specifically disagree.

You don't need the disclaimer, nothing about your post was rude or confrontational.
The issues with that version of True Strike are two-fold. Firstly, static attack bonuses are always going to be a more powerful buff that Advantage by virtue of how easily obtained Advantage is. Attack bonuses are rare and very easy to stack with Advantage - that is why Bless is considered such a powerful spell. Because Advantage is easy to obtain, static attack bonuses aren't and that is why static attack bonuses are much, much more valuable.
Secondly, that version of True Strike has no opportunity cost for the Rogue or Cleric. A Rogue or Cleric are strictly better by using the spell - at least with the other versions of the spell, they are sacrificing their bonus action. This version sacrifices literally nothing for them.
I also don't understand why you are so supportive of this version considering your reasons for vetoing bonus action True Strikes (Mainly the fact that it favours two-handed fighters over dual-wielders). When you apply that same level of scrutiny on this version, it falls apart on the same level - this version favours those with few attacks (Rogues) over those that have many (Fighters).
Basically, this version of the spell is what I consider to be the most powerful version mentioned in the entire thread and it claims that title with a significant margin - not only does this version have the best action economy, it also has the best accuracy buff and even chucks in a couple of extra rider effects on top.

To put it in perspective, a level 20 Rogue using this version of True Strike with a simple Rapier increases his average damage against AC 18 by more than a level 20 Fighter does against that same AC by using GWM's -5 to-hit +10 damage aspect. This version is simply far too powerful and a must-have ability. Generally when something becomes a must-have ability, it isn't going to have a positive effect on balance.

[Kryx]

You don't need the disclaimer, nothing about your post was rude or confrontational.
We both want a better version of True Strike so I was just clarifying my intentions and saying that I wasn't trying to devolve this into typical forum arguing.


Firstly, static attack bonuses are always going to be a more powerful buff that Advantage by virtue of how easily obtained Advantage is. Attack bonuses are rare and very easy to stack with Advantage - that is why Bless is considered such a powerful spell. Because Advantage is easy to obtain, static attack bonuses aren't and that is why static attack bonuses are much, much more valuable.
I wouldn't consider Advantage "easy" to obtain, but I agree static bonuses are hard to come by. The reason I didn't have as big of a problem as normal with it in this case is in 3.X True Strike gave a +20 to hit. Literally an auto hit in basically every case.

I agree that static bonuses are normally a concern. I'm usually on your side of the argument, and maybe you're right here as well. The issue is True Strike as a "1 melee attack with a higher chance to hit" cantrip needs something. If you give it advantage it's too strong for Rogue and several other cases.



Secondly, that version of True Strike has no opportunity cost for the Rogue or Cleric. A Rogue or Cleric are strictly better by using the spell - at least with the other versions of the spell, they are sacrificing their bonus action. This version sacrifices literally nothing for them.
I'm not sure the numbers agree there. Lets find out (for my sake as well):

A level 7 rogue sneak attacks for 4d6 damage (average 14). The normal chance to hit at 7 is around 65%. For the TWF version we'll assume he took dex instead of dual wield at 4. Let's assume True Strike ignores half cover for sake of exercise.

Single shortsword his weapon damage is an average of 3.5+3 = 6.5. Total DPR for a single weapon rogue is 6.5*.65 = 4.225 for weapons and 14*.65 = 9.1 for Sneak Attack for 13.325 DPR
TWF shortswords his weapon damage is an average of 3.5+3 = 6.5. His second attack averages 3.5. Total DPR for TWF is 6.5+3.5= 10*.65 = 6.5 for weapons and 14*.88 = 12.32 for Sneak Attack for 18.82 DPR
Single shortsword with flat bonus True Strike his weapon damage is an average of 3.5+3 = 6.5. Total DPR for a single weapon rogue is 6.5*.8 = 5.2 for weapons and 14*.8 = 11.2 for Sneak Attack for 16.4 DPR

So even if we assume that this attack has half cover the TWF version does more DPR. With 3/4 cover or disadvantage from environmental effects the math would likely benefit True Strike - and that's perfectly fine as that is the niche this version defines.


I also don't understand why you are so supportive of this version considering your reasons for vetoing bonus action True Strikes (Mainly the fact that it favours two-handed fighters over dual-wielders).
TWF is a big factor, but TWF is not the main issue of the proposed Bonus Action suggestions. I'll quote the GWM part I edited in above:
"To actually refine my earlier discussion about GWM: It actually doesn't conflict at all with the bonus action from that. You would simply use your normal attack and then if it doesn't proc GWM you use your Bonus Action for True Strike. Literally every round that it doesn't proc you would use True Strike."


When you apply that same level of scrutiny on this version, it falls apart on the same level - this version favours those with few attacks (Rogues) over those that have many (Fighters).
True Strike has always been more accurate on one attack. That is true in 3.X, true in 5e, true in your bonus action version as well.

Though I think you're right that I supported this version too soon w/o further feedback.


Basically, this version of the spell is what I consider to be the most powerful version mentioned in the entire thread and it claims that title with a significant margin - not only does this version have the best action economy, it also has the best accuracy buff and even chucks in a couple of extra rider effects on top.
I'm not seeing that. With the math I put above it is not the best for the rogue at level 7 at least. I agree that ignoring disadvantage may be too much - that should probably be removed. I agree that the flat bonus may be bad, but from the math so far the scaling bonus isn't so bad at all. The math would get closer for the rogue at 11+, but I still think the TWF would win (I don't have the time to math it out right now).

Though I do think sticking True Strike into the "ignore cover" niche isn't necessarily within it's flavor either.


To put it in perspective, a level 20 Rogue using this version of True Strike with a simple Rapier increases his average damage against AC 18 by more than a level 20 Fighter does against that same AC by using GWM's -5 to-hit +10 damage aspect. This version is simply far too powerful and a must-have ability. Generally when something becomes a must-have ability, it isn't going to have a positive effect on balance.
This "must have" issue is the exact reason that a Bonus Action is not a good choice. See the GWM issue I outlined above. It's true for many classes.
I'd like to see the math for a rogue vs a fighter (don't have time right now). As I said above all versions of True Strike that have been suggested so far improve a single attack class more than a fighter, but the fighter still adds a good amount of DPR for using it.

[Nifft]

Just realized that I'd forgotten something really important.

I think this version also makes the math less ambiguous -- and makes the cantrip solidly niche.


True Strike
Divination Cantrip

Casting Time: 1 action
Range: Self
Components: S
Duration: Instantaneous

As part of casting this spell, you make a single special melee or ranged attack.
- The defender does not gain a benefit to AC from half or three-quarters cover against this attack.
- This attack does not suffer Disadvantage from any environmental effect, including inability see the target due to heavily obscured vision, heavy wind, etc.
- If you are at least 5th level, this attack does not suffer Disadvantage from any Illusion effect, including Blur, Invisibility, etc.
- If you are at least 11th level, you gain a +1 bonus on the attack roll. At 17th level, the bonus increases to +2.

[Kryx]

True Strike
Divination Cantrip

Casting Time: 1 action
Range: Self
Components: S
Duration: Instantaneous

As part of casting this spell, you make a single special melee or ranged attack.
- The defender does not gain a benefit to AC from half or three-quarters cover against this attack.
- This attack does not suffer Disadvantage from any environmental effect, including inability see the target due to heavily obscured vision, heavy wind, etc.
- If you are at least 5th level, this attack does not suffer Disadvantage from any Illusion effect, including Blur, Invisibility, etc.
- If you are at least 11th level, you gain a +1 bonus on the attack roll. At 17th level, the bonus increases to +2.
The wording should match pre-existing wording like Sharpshooter.

As part of casting this spell, you make a single melee or ranged attack. This attack ignores half cover and three-quarters cover. It also does not suffer Disadvantage from any environmental effect, including inability see the target due to heavily obscured vision, heavy wind, etc. When you reach 5th level the attack also does not suffer Disadvantage from any illusion effect, including Blur, Invisibility, etc.
You gain a +1 bonus to the attack roll when you reach 11th level (+1), 17th level (+2).

I think ignoring disadvantage is too strong. Ignoring Cover while doing 1 decent attack is enough. It's one or the other imo.

I'm still a bit all over the place, but I do like True Strike's default usage quite a bit. For instance a wizard can blow his action this turn and then have a significantly higher chance at hitting next turn with Plane Shift. I think having it usable on spells is a good choice. I think I'll go back to increased duration to maintain that usage and allow for some pre-fight buff that takes concentration and can be broken.

[PoeticDwarf]

Nice list, but you can longstrider cast on a horse or something, so you ride away from the guards with 140ft instead of 70ft. No concentration, duration 1 hour. My 1 druid 14 monk uses longstrider way too often.

Dancing lights is better than light, I think.

Cloud of daggers, as you said, is not that bad. You don't want it for warlock but not worst for sorcerer.

Witch bolt and true strike are bad options, the acid arrow also is. I don't see where you can use jump.

The others can be usefull.

[Kryx]

Nice list, but you can longstrider cast on a horse or something, so you ride away from the guards with 140ft instead of 70ft.
It increase the speed by 10 feet. So a riding horse is 70 ft or 140ft if dashing. Slightly better than 60/120, but not worth the slot for that imo.


Dancing lights is better than light, I think.
They have their different uses, but most people would disagree. Either way a combined version isn't overly powerful

[KorvinStarmast]

Clerics cantrip Resistance seems like there are better option when it comes to using an action If you cast it just before a rogue tries to disarm a trap, or before the barbarian initiates combat, it's pretty handy due to the save which can only be used once.

[SharkForce]

Dancing lights is better than light, I think.

dancing lights requires concentration. light does not.

now, certainly, every now and then you can do something creative with dancing lights, but it's pretty situational, and right now that situation also has to include "i don't want to concentrate on something more useful instead". which is particularly a problem when you get into combat and now your light source requires you to concentrate on it instead of casting web, or summoning minions, etc.

if you want light at a range from you, use light and mage hand together. again, no concentration required.

[Orbis Orboros]

Edit: didn't read enough of the thread. Ignore me. :smallsigh:

[SharkForce]

Just wanted to chime in on the True Strike suggestion - making it a bonus action is really abusable for Rogues that pick it up somehow, such as with Magic Initiate. They only get one scaling attack per turn (Ideal situation for this cantrip), and can trigger Sneak Attack off of the advantage.

for the last time, bonus action true strike isn't broken with rogues.

rogues ALREADY HAVE an option to make 2 attack rolls at the expense of their bonus action, it's called two-weapon fighting, and it is BETTER than advantage because if both hit they get extra damage.

failing that, rogues can *also* hide as a bonus action and then attack from hiding, in which case they also get advantage as a bonus action, although they do need to make a skill check (which they are extremely likely to make, mind you, what with expertise and the multitude of ways to get a ridiculous bonus to stealth checks).

a rogue *could* take a bonus action true strike cantrip, but they'd be stupid to do so, because the default rogue has better options than that which are available at earlier levels or with fewer resources spent.

this is NOT a must-have for rogues. it is an option which they have, but which is not even remotely necessary and which frankly does not add an awful lot in the vast majority of cases.

[Kryx]

Indeed it would be pretty inconsequential for Rogue's power. However that speaks a great deal to how much a Rogue would lose in comparison to other classes as they gained the ability to mimic it in a way.

However GWM and Sword and Board EKs are the bigger issue imo. That and spells.

[SharkForce]

there is no melee class where they are better served by using true strike than they are by making an attack with their bonus action in the majority of cases. for any class that puts forward the effort to get true strike, it will always be a niche spell. you've got one dose of a super-effective poison on a dart? sure, that might be worth using true strike. but for general DPR? true strike is one option that is not generally going to be as good as simply making another attack, rather than simply getting to make an extra attack roll.

[Kryx]

there is no melee class where they are better served by using true strike than they are by making an attack with their bonus action in the majority of cases.
This is not true. A GWM could use true strike every round that they do not proc it. A Sword and Board EK can use it every round. This has been pointed out several times.

There are also classes that can feat it, but that's less ideal.

Casters with a bonus action can now have most of their blast spells at with advantage.

[Nifft]

IMHO, letting True Strike work for a single GWM attack ought to be intended behavior. Choosing to make a single attack at high level is an unusual situation.

That's why I went with the negation of situational penalties as the main feature, rather than any kind of inherent buff, and only gave an inherent buff at the levels where multiple attacks ought to be expected as the norm.

- - -

IMHO, the functional requirements for True Strike ought to be:
- Single-attack mechanics.
- Divination-flavor. That's why I have it work against Illusions and poor lightning.
- "Impossible called shot." That's why I have it work against strong wind.

I'm not totally sold on the idea that True Strike should modify spell attacks. Spell attacks seem pretty good already.

However, I'm also not totally sold on the idea that True Strike must provide an identical benefit to spell attacks and weapon attacks.

Perhaps True Strike provides advantage to spells, and negates environmental penalties for weapon attacks.

[SharkForce]

This is not true. A GWM could use true strike every round that they do not proc it. A Sword and Board EK can use it every round. This has been pointed out several times.

There are also classes that can feat it, but that's less ideal.

Casters with a bonus action can now have most of their blast spells at with advantage.

a sword and board EK will want to be using shield expert if at all possible, or potentially polearm master if their DM allows 1-handed use of a staff to count. a GWM character still wants polearm mastery, not magic initiate, to boost their damage (and gain a very easy way to trigger reaction attacks). a GWM eldritch knight who doesn't yet have polearm mastery (which will be a better boost) or who chooses not to take polearm mastery... will be combining swords and sorcery to gain a slight boost that won't break the game because it is smaller than they could have gained with other options. how is this a bad thing?

and no, it doesn't help most blast spells, because you can't cast a bonus action spell and a non-cantrip in the same round. it helps cantrips. which you should not be specializing in (unless the cantrip in question is eldritch blast, in which case you have better uses of your concentration and bonus action, or the cantrip is in addition to a quickened spell, in which case you have no bonus action to spare for true strike), because the only reason you have them in the first place is so that you can help with mop up operations after the fight has already been won without having to resort to a crossbow or dagger. not to mention most of the good blast spells don't call for an attack roll at all.

[Kryx]

IMHO, letting True Strike work for a single GWM attack ought to be intended behavior. Choosing to make a single attack at high level is an unusual situation.
True Strike as an action has that cost, ya. True Strike as a Bonus Action does not have that cost. It happens every round and makes your first attack have advantage and the rest be normal.


and no, it doesn't help most blast spells, because you can't cast a bonus action spell and a non-cantrip in the same round
True Strike is a cantrip.
1st round: Normal Spell + True Strike
2nd round: Attack spell made with advantage + True Strike
3rd round: Attack spell made with advantage + True Strike

It's amazing for blasters.

If you want spam True Strike every round for consistent Advantage then go ahead. I do not consider that balanced. We've debated enough - I won't respond to Bonus Action stuff anymore.

[SharkForce]

True Strike is a cantrip.
1st round: Normal Spell + True Strike
2nd round: Attack spell made with advantage + True Strike
3rd round: Attack spell made with advantage + True Strike

It's amazing for blasters.

If you want spam True Strike every round for consistent Advantage then go ahead. I do not consider that balanced. We've debated enough - I won't respond to Bonus Action stuff anymore.

that is *your* house rules. the official rules are that you can't use a normal spell other than a cantrip in the same as a bonus action spell, whether the bonus action spell was a cantrip or not.

if this is for general use, the spell works fine. don't blame us for your house rules.

[MaxWilson]

True Strike
Suggestions: Make it a bonus action
True Stike is available to Bard, Sorcerer, Warlock, and Wizard. Making it a bonus action would cause Two Handed Baldelocks to be infinitely superior to TWF bladelocks. Same thing for EK. This would make the spell sky blue for those classes and would invalidate other options. Allowing it to be cast on someone else as a touch would also make this a really great cantrip and expand the action economy for a lot of classes. So good that it would ideally be used every round on the archer that is next to the wizard. I don't think that's a good option. But I have no better suggestions.

I wouldn't worry about the archer thing unless you increase the range on it at the same time. It only works out to 30 feet maximum currently.

[Kryx]

that is *your* house rules. the official rules are that you can't use a normal spell other than a cantrip in the same as a bonus action spell, whether the bonus action spell was a cantrip or not.
That is not my houserule. Order of casting matters and what I put above is RAW.

Bonus Action
A spell cast with a bonus action is especially swift. You must use a bonus action on your turn to cast the spell, provided that you haven’t already taken a bonus action this turn. You can’t cast another spell during the same turn, except for a cantrip with a casting time of 1 action.

Though while searching for a tweet about it I've found this Crawford tweet which wouldn't allow it:
https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/502551591539720192

If you've already cast a spell of 1st level or higher on your turn, you can't cast a bonus action spell on that turn.
Though he may not be considering a bonus action Cantrip as one does not exist normally. It's hard to say.

[SharkForce]

That is not my houserule. Order of casting matters and what I put above is RAW.


Though while searching for a tweet about it I've found this Crawford tweet which wouldn't allow it:
https://twitter.com/JeremyECrawford/status/502551591539720192

Though he may not be considering a bonus action Cantrip as one does not exist normally. It's hard to say.

no, order doesn't matter.

you can't cast another spell this turn unless it is a cantrip with a casting time of 1 action. if you have already cast another spell, and it wasn't a cantrip with a casting time of 1 action, you can't cast a bonus action spell. if you cast the bonus action spell, and then you decide that you want to cast a spell that is not a cantrip with a casting time of 1 action, you can't cast that spell. it does not matter whether your bonus action spell is a cantrip or not.

it does not, for example, say that you can only cast cantrips *after* you use a bonus action spell. rather, it very specifically says that you cannot combine two things in the same turn. regardless of the order in which you do those two things, they are still in the same turn.

thus, it is your house rules causing the problem. the official rules are clear. if you cast true strike as a bonus action, the only other spell you can cast this turn is a cantrip with a casting time of 1 action. if you cast anything other than a cantrip with a casting time of 1 action, you cannot cast a bonus action spell. period. whether that bonus action spell is a cantrip or not.

[Kryx]

no, order doesn't matter.
By RAW it does. By Crawford's tweet it doesn't. I would agree that we should go by Crawford's tweet so the spellcasting issue is gone.

thus, it is your house rules causing the problem.
It is not my houserule - it is RAW that are far as I had seen was accepted by a fair amount of the community on a very poorly worded part of 5e. I was unaware of the intent or the tweet until making the post, so please stop being rude about it.


The only issue that remains is GWM. You feel like that is not an issue. I do.


There is really nothing more to discuss.

[SharkForce]

order doesn't matter. it doesn't matter whether you do the bonus action before or after, it is still in the same turn. the turn does not magically end when the bonus action spell is cast, nor does a new turn begin when a cantrip is cast.

if you want to cast a bonus action spell (cantrip or otherwise), the only other kind of spell you can cast in that turn is a cantrip that takes 1 action to cast. whether before or after in the turn, if it is in the same turn, no other combination is possible. you yourself quoted it: "You can’t cast another spell during the same turn, except for a cantrip with a casting time of 1 action."

no mention is made of before or after, the limit is clearly applied to the turn. not to actions taken after casting a spell as a bonus action, but to the entire turn. if something you attempt to do exceeds that limit within the turn, the rules do not allow it to happen, regardless of when in the turn the events happen.

casting magic missile followed by bonus action magic missile is in violation of that rule just as much as casting a bonus action magic missile followed by casting a magic missile. this is not just Crawford's interpretation. it is also exactly what the rules say.

[Nifft]

Okay, so assuming that the rules do work like Crawford says, then the Bonus Action issue becomes:

Odd Round:
- Attack Cantrip
- Bonus Action True Strike

Even Round:
- Attack Spell (gains benefit from True Strike)

Order still matters, just like Kryx postulated, but the optimal pattern is spread across two turns.

The consequence is that you gain a Bonus Action spell benefit on a non-Cantrip, which feels like a violation of the intent of the Bonus Action spell restriction.

[Kryx]

Yea, the delayed round advantage is still nice. I forgot about that. Not quite as nice for burst, but good for conservation.

[SharkForce]

Okay, so assuming that the rules do work like Crawford says, then the Bonus Action issue becomes:

Odd Round:
- Attack Cantrip
- Bonus Action True Strike

Even Round:
- Attack Spell (gains benefit from True Strike)

Order still matters, just like Kryx postulated, but the optimal pattern is spread across two turns.

The consequence is that you gain a Bonus Action spell benefit on a non-Cantrip, which feels like a violation of the intent of the Bonus Action spell restriction.

I'm hard-pressed to think of a spell I'd want to land so badly that I'm willing to guarantee having negligible impact in round 1, when it is *most* important to make your mark on the battle, to have an increased chance of hitting in round 2, bearing in mind that whatever touch spell I'm landing cannot use concentration, because casting a concentration spell ends your previous concentration.

so at this point, we're pretty much talking about casting a non-concentration cantrip spell in round 1 when I *could* be throwing web, or hypnotic pattern, or anything else that is likely to actually make a difference, so that I can cast a single-target non-concentration spell with slightly more accuracy.

this build is getting to the point where I don't think I can even call it a niche build, because so far I haven't heard anything that's persuaded me this is a niche worth occupying.

[TurboGhast]

Why should we split thos concept of a "Buff the NVE spells" be split into multiple threads? I think it would be better to put all the buff ideas into one thread, thereby keeping things organized and letting people improve spells out of level order.

[SharkForce]

Why should we split thos concept of a "Buff the NVE spells" be split into multiple threads? I think it would be better to put all the buff ideas into one thread, thereby keeping things organized and letting people improve spells out of level order.

probably to keep discussion a bit more focused.

even with just 0-2, there were a lot of spells to cover. there's a practical limit to how many conversations you can have in one thread at one time without everything getting lost in the background noise.

i would say that at some point a compilation thread would make sense, though.

[Kryx]

probably to keep discussion a bit more focused.

even with just 0-2, there were a lot of spells to cover. there's a practical limit to how many conversations you can have in one thread at one time without everything getting lost in the background noise.

i would say that at some point a compilation thread would make sense, though.
Exactly this. There are a lot of spells and discussing 50 at once isn't practical.

I've been working on a PF -> 5e monster converter so I haven't put up the 3rd-5th level spells yet. I have most of the post worked out and will post soon.

[TurboGhast]

Okay, the thread split makes sense now.
I think we should have the last thread (this is assuming it's 6th-9th, 6th-8th follows pattern leaves a thread for only 9th level spells) made so that every spell can be worked on, though.

[Nifft]

So, more thinking about flame blade.

I think the cantrip solution is fine, and will work.

But, I also saw the Paladin spell elemental weapon, and it got me thinking about alternatives.

Here's what I came up with:

Flame Blade
2nd level Evocation
Casting Time: 1 action
Range: Self
Components: V, S, M (leaf of sumac)
Duration: 8 hours

You evoke a fiery blade in your free hand. The blade functions as a scimitar which deals an additional +1d4 fire damage, and it lasts for the duration. If you let go of the blade, it disappears, but you can evoke the blade again as a bonus action. You are proficient with the blade.

You can use your action to make a special melee spell attack with the fiery blade. On a hit, the target takes 3d6 fire damage.

The flaming blade sheds bright light in a 10-foot radius and dim light for an additional 10 feet.

At Higher Levels:
- If you use a 3rd level spell slot, the fiery blade gains a +1 bonus to attack rolls and spell attack rolls.
- If you use a 4th level spell slot, you can cast the spell on an ally you are touching.
- If you use a 5th level spell slot, the scimitar inflicts +2d4 fire damage, and the special melee spell attack inflicts 6d6 fire damage.
- If you use a 6th level spell slot, the fiery blade gains a +2 bonus to attack rolls and spell attack rolls.
- If you use a 7th level spell slot, you can cast the spell on yourself and up to six allies you are touching.
- If you use an 8th level spell slot, the scimitar inflicts +3d4 fire damage, and the special melee spell attack inflicts 12d6 fire damage.
- If you use a 9th level spell slot, the fiery blade gains a +3 bonus to attack rolls and spell attack rolls.

- - -

As compared to Elemental Weapon:
- Scaling is slower
- Only one damage type instead of five choices
- Duration does not involve Concentration at all
- You can share it with a friend

It becomes the "screw being disarmed, ever" spell.

Give it to Rangers and Druids. For Rangers, it negates one major annoyance of using a bow -- the inelegance of swapping between ranged and melee combat -- since you can just summon your blade as a bonus action, stab the interloper in the face, and drop your blade (which disappears) as a free action next round.