True Strike, for when an apple needs shot off a head or negotiations are going wrong?

[MarkVIIIMarc]

https://roll20.net/compendium/dnd5e/True%20Strike#content

"You extend your hand and point a finger at a target in range. Your magic grants you a brief Insight (https://roll20.net/compendium/dnd5e/Insight#h-Insight) into the target's defenses. On your next turn, you gain advantage on your first Attack (https://roll20.net/compendium/dnd5e/Combat#h-Attack) roll against the target, provided that this spell hasn't ended."

This seems fairly situational but not quite as bad as its passed off as. In the middle of combat I agree its not to be used. However I tend to DM grey worlds where good and bad aren't always super clear. My parties will negotiate sometimes with the bad guys and right before things hit the fan take a shot at intimidation by saying "I put my hand on my sword" "I notch an arrow" or whatever. I can see True Strike coming in handy here.

I imagine it might be useful for an assassin character also. Preferably one out of sight of whoever they're casting this one.

OR

That rare occasion where you have to shoot an apple off the top of a head or something similarly ridiculous.

So yeah, as far as in combat, it kinda sucks. Right before taking that first shot though...

[Unoriginal]

True Strike doesn't do anything for CHA checks, it only affects you next attack roll. Your intimidation attempt would not be affected.

Also if someone starts casting a spell unprompted in the middle of a negotiation with hostile people, I'd expect an arrow in their neck as soon as possible.

[Sharur]

There are, as far as I can fathom, only threetwo situations where True Strike is worthwhile:
1. In an ambush situation, as the ambusher when you don't have stealth(although generally you are already attacking from stealth in that situation).
2. In a gish build that allows spell casting and attacks in the same turn A closer reading of both the Valor Bard and Eldritch Knight only allow for a single attack as a bonus action, rather than an attack option, and both builds have Extra Attack at that point, so you might as well attack twice.
3. As a (Arcane Trickster) rogue, when for some reason you don't have any other means of gaining advantage for Sneak Attack.

Also, there is a strange interaction with the Warcaster feat: A caster can use their attack of opportunity to cast True Strike, then attack within a minute for advantage (on the first attack).

With regards to "an arrow in the neck", that would certainly be a possibility, but I would say not a certainly. True Strike doesn't have verbal components, only somatic, which the spell specifies as pointing at the target. That is still a hostile gesture, especially from a spellcaster, but then so is grabbing a sword or nocking an arrow.

I would allow True Strike to prompt an Intimidation check, although when DMing I generally don't require a specific action to attempt to intimidate (but I have played with DMs who would require a player to specify how they were trying to be intimidating).

Personally, I find True Strike to be underpowered.

[Mellack]

https://roll20.net/compendium/dnd5e/True%20Strike#content

"You extend your hand and point a finger at a target in range. Your magic grants you a brief Insight (https://roll20.net/compendium/dnd5e/Insight#h-Insight) into the target's defenses. On your next turn, you gain advantage on your first Attack (https://roll20.net/compendium/dnd5e/Combat#h-Attack) roll against the target, provided that this spell hasn't ended."

This seems fairly situational but not quite as bad as its passed off as. In the middle of combat I agree its not to be used. However I tend to DM grey worlds where good and bad aren't always super clear. My parties will negotiate sometimes with the bad guys and right before things hit the fan take a shot at intimidation by saying "I put my hand on my sword" "I notch an arrow" or whatever. I can see True Strike coming in handy here.

I imagine it might be useful for an assassin character also. Preferably one out of sight of whoever they're casting this one.

OR

That rare occasion where you have to shoot an apple off the top of a head or something similarly ridiculous.

So yeah, as far as in combat, it kinda sucks. Right before taking that first shot though...

Don't forget that True Strike has a poor range of just 30 feet. So it generally won't even work for the apple shot as that is probably too far away. Sadly it is just a terrible cantrip as you can get advantage in so many other ways. The assassin is usually hiding already, so the cantrip gains nothing. It is just too rarely useful to be worth taking up a slot.

[MarkVIIIMarc]

Don't forget that True Strike has a poor range of just 30 feet. So it generally won't even work for the apple shot as that is probably too far away. Sadly it is just a terrible cantrip as you can get advantage in so many other ways. The assassin is usually hiding already, so the cantrip gains nothing. It is just too rarely useful to be worth taking up a slot.

Valid point.

Could I cast True Strike, walk 30 feet away and take the shot from a distance of 60 feet with advantage?

[hymer]

Could I cast True Strike, walk 30 feet away and take the shot from a distance of 60 feet with advantage?
Yes. The spell doesn't end if you move out of range.

[SpanielBear]

All of this, and any discussion of True Strike, also needs to bear in mind that cantrips are limited, and can’t necessarily be changed (without a friendly DM). So even given a niche use, it remains poor because by simply existing you are almost guaranteed to be losing out on a more generally applicable cantrip.

Like friends. Which does what you want true strike to do in this case.

“We’re all friends here, why not just put those pointy sticks down for a sec. Thank you. Now I’m just going to walk quickly away, but I want all of you to stay still and watch what my friend Theophrastus Bombastus is doing with that sulphur and bat guano.”

[iTreeby]

The subtle sorcerer could perhaps use it as a precombat buff... Assuming they want to use sorcery points but not spell slots for some reason?

[Schopy]

How would you all rate a houserule change of that (rather bad) cantrip to a version that first negates all disadvantages and than grants advantage to the first attack. In effect, regardless of the circumstances you truly have advantage on that attack next round.

So if you were poisoned you could either attack 2 rounds each with disadvantage or cast that cantrip in the first round and attack with advantage in the second round (ignoring multiple attacks for now).

Good change? Still bad? Or good, but opens up other unintended side effects?

[Blood of Gaea]

With the existence of blade cantrips, I think it would work best as something like that. Additional damage to a single weapon attack with a rider effect.

A quick idea of how it could look:

True Strike

Level: Cantrip
Casting Time: 1 Action
Range: 30 feet
Components: V, M (a weapon)
Duration: Instantaneous

Your magic grants you a brief insight into the target's defenses. As part of the action to cast this spell, you must make a weapon attack with a weapon against one creature within the spell's range, otherwise, the spell fails, this attack is made with advantage.

At 5th level, the weapon attack deals an extra 1d8 damage. The damage roll increases by 1d8 at 11th and 17th level.

[JackPhoenix]

If you start casting a spell during negotiations with hostile party, initiative gets rolled and combat starts. And it's generally not worth it wasting your first turn on such a bad spell.

[bid]

With the existence of blade cantrips, I think it would work best as something like that. Additional damage to a single weapon attack with a rider effect.

A quick idea of how it could look:

True Strike

Level: Cantrip
Casting Time: 1 Action
Range: 30 feet
Components: V, M (a weapon)
Duration: Instantaneous

Your magic grants you a brief insight into the target's defenses. As part of the action to cast this spell, you must make a weapon attack with a weapon against one creature within the spell's range, otherwise, the spell fails, this attack is made with advantage.

At 5th level, the weapon attack deals an extra 1d8 damage. The damage roll increases by 1d8 at 11th and 17th level.
So, automatic SA every turn.

Not necessarily bad, but not what you planned... maybe?

[Blood of Gaea]

So, automatic SA every turn.

Not necessarily bad, but not what you planned... maybe?
I had that in mind, sneak attack is already meant to be used every turn. This just means you have another way to do it.

There are other ways you could do it, it just didn't seem overpowered to me. Even an Arcane Trickster is giving up the riders and damage types of Green-Flame or Booming Blade, or the chance to use a bonus action attack.

That said, it's definitely a buff for ranged rogues.

An alternative would be just giving +2 to hit.

[Sharur]

Blood of Gaia, to be honest, I dislike your proposal. But then I hate the SCAG blade cantrips, so, not very surprising.

If we are are going to tweak it to be more worthwhile, I would make it so that you don't have to take the attack yourself, e.g. the wizard could cast true. Phrase it something like "You extend your hand and point a finger at a target in range. Your magic grants you and your nearby allies a brief insight into the target's defenses. The next attack made against the target has advantage, provided that this spell hasn't ended."

I don't find the range to be too much of an issue, as most of the combats that I've gotten into started at 60ft range or less.

[NaughtyTiger]

i didn't even realize there was a range until this thread.
it is even worse than i realized.

[Damon_Tor]

When you use a spell that requires an attack roll, you're creating a real risk that you're going to waste that spell slot doing nothing. So True Strike could protect that investment.

The biggest problem here is that they decided to publish so few spells that use spell attacks. I can see a low level sorcerer getting good use out of this to make sure his Chromatic Orbs do what they're supposed to do, but it's going to wear out it's usefulness when the first and second level spell slots stop being useful for offensive purposes.

But still, it's not as useless as people like to pretend it is.

[Mellack]

Also remember that fights in 5e often only last 3-4 rounds. Spending one of those rounds just preparing for your next attack is a big cost.

[Phoenix042]

When you use a spell that requires an attack roll, you're creating a real risk that you're going to waste that spell slot doing nothing. So True Strike could protect that investment.

The biggest problem here is that they decided to publish so few spells that use spell attacks. I can see a low level sorcerer getting good use out of this to make sure his Chromatic Orbs do what they're supposed to do, but it's going to wear out it's usefulness when the first and second level spell slots stop being useful for offensive purposes.

But still, it's not as useless as people like to pretend it is.

The problem with that theory is that a single chromatic orb with advantage isn't really significantly better than a chromatic orb and a firebolt; it might not really be any better depending on the situation.

[Edenbeast]

I find it strange that True Strike was changed in that sense. True Strike in 3.5 gives a +20 on your next attack roll, so basically an automatic hit (in most cases, but it does not count as a natural 20). It's range is personal and in addition, you ignore the miss change for hitting a concealed target. That makes the spell worthwhile to cast whenever your really need to hit. Giving advantage means you can still miss, so casting the spell in 5e can be a potential waste of your actions. Even though it can be cast at will in 5e, it still requires an extra action spend on casting the spell. I therefor prefer to use the older version.

[Damon_Tor]

The problem with that theory is that a single chromatic orb with advantage isn't really significantly better than a chromatic orb and a firebolt; it might not really be any better depending on the situation.

With Elven Accuracy it probably would be at least until firebolt doubles to 2d10 at level 5, but then "exactly at level 4" is a pretty terrible range for a cantrip's useful lifespan.