How is True Strike not overpowered?

[RNightstalker]

First off, a +20 bonus for a 1st level spell?!?!?!

Secondly, it's an insight bonus so it will stack with most everything else as they're not too common.

Thirdly, its on ANY attack roll: ranged, melee, touch.

Has anyone else nerfed this at their table?
Would having it give a smaller bonus that gives additional bonuses at higher levels be more appropriate, like +1 to start and an additional +1 for every two caster levels?

[Vhaidara]

It's a standard action to cast and only affects one attack. So you effectively give up an entire turn to makes sure 1 attack lands. In a game that generally relies on either multiple attacks or disabling enemies without using attack rolls (generally via saves, sometimes without even allowing for saves), its use is extremely limited.

[Cygnia]

For starters, it's usually a standard action cast AND its range is personal. So you can't just drop this on your fighters.

[Kuulvheysoon]

Well, it's a Standard Action to cast, Personal range and only applies to the next attack (singular) before the end of the next round. Low level casters don't deal enough damage for the spell to be worth it, and by the time that they do get enough oopmh behind them to take advantage of that +20, they've usually got better things to do with the action, or they're making multiple attacks (like scorching ray).

[Efrate]

It's a standard action to cast. You take a turn off, and spend a spell to make sure your next attack hits. That's 2 rounds of actions for 1 round of action, plus a slot. It's also personal only. And it's overkill on most touch attacks, except early where it's a slot for it then likely another slot which is most of your spells at level 1. If you use it to make your crossbow hit it's a waste. It's good with thing like shivering touch and dragons but that's the circumstance it shines in, and it's still a wasted round of actions that doesn't immediately affect the fight.

[Darg]

It's really great when you stack damage multipliers and/or when you take advantage of single hit attacks like Whirlwind Attack, decisive strike/overpowering strike ACFs, or using a lance while mounted.

Other than that, it's for when you wouldn't be hitting the target, but still need to do something. Because of the action cost or the resource cost of a 5th level slot to use on the same turn, it isn't a versatile spell and is really only usable for niche cases.

[Jay R]

It looks like it ought to be, doesn't it? But the truth is, in actual use it doesn't overwhelm your foes.

Others have given the theoretical answer (it takes two rounds for one attack, only the wizard gets the benefit, etc.). The practical answer is that nobody has ever managed to dominate the game with it.

Try it in a game some time. You will see that it doesn't, in fact, distort the game.

[Biggus]

In my games it generally only gets used as a quickened spell (which means it's effectively 5th level) as it's very rarely worth using a standard action to cast. If you've got a ray spell you're pretty sure will **** up your opponent it can be worth it for a 95% chance to hit, but most creatures don't have very high touch AC anyway.

[Pinkie Pyro]

Simple answer is, it's only as powerful as your next attack would be if it hits. and even then, less so, because you're taking an entire extra action for it.

Sure, a paladin could drop 2 feats and get battle blessing and sword of the arcane order to cast it as a swift action with no upcast, but that's as far as you can take it.

The often thought of "broken" form of true strike is using the custom magic item creation rules to just make an item of perpetual true strike. Due to the spell's effect, instead of giving +20 to hit on each attack roll, this would only give a +20 to your next attack roll after spending a standard action to activate the item, but it would last until you made an attack.

[RexDart]

It's a fairly nice spell for a Duskblade (used with Quick Cast), but even there, better spell choices exist.

[Rynjin]

Let's assume you deal 1d8+6 damage with your primary attack.

You cast True Strike (1 standard action) and then the following turn attack (1 standard action). You have a 95% chance to deal 1d8+6 damage.

Does having an (almost) guarantee of dealing 1d8+6 damage sound like a good use of your time?

If so, have you considered casting Magic Missile instead, which deals 3d4+3 damage, with 100% accuracy?

That's the exact same average damage BTW. And it's twice as fast.

Edit: This question was so out of left field I actually thought this was the 5e forum.

True Strike is SIGNIFICANTLY worse in 3.5 than even 5e.

[Particle_Man]

True strike (or at least a silent version of it) is nice for assassins. If you spend all that time setting up the death attack, it would be a shame to then miss with it.

[Calthropstu]

I have seen a build that used it. It got a quick version and the purpose was to make absurd bull rush attacks, knocking enemies 100 feet. It was paired with a ranger for some serious tactic advantage.

[Fizban]

First off, a +20 bonus for a 1st level spell?!?!?!

Secondly, it's an insight bonus so it will stack with most everything else as they're not too common.

Thirdly, its on ANY attack roll: ranged, melee, touch.

Has anyone else nerfed this at their table?
Would having it give a smaller bonus that gives additional bonuses at higher levels be more appropriate, like +1 to start and an additional +1 for every two caster levels?
First off: ignore the forum. If it's caused problems in your games and you think it needs a nerf, nerf it. A +10 would still be plenty worth casting for the sort of character it's "aimed" at. Don't forget it also lets you ignore concealment. I wouldn't necessarily drop it all the way down to +1/level or +1/2 levels, that does make it a little too extremely niche (though on the other hand, even just the ignoring of concealment for a single attack at 1st is still easily read as a reasonable situational 1st level spell), but more importantly such a nerf can have the opposite effect: they look at how small the bonus is and think it should be a swift action, because there are swift action spells with low bonuses like that, and now you're pressured to remove the major feature/restriction while also making a spell that is still more powerful than those existing swift action spells.

Secondly: people don't think it's overpowered because there's a certain blindness to combos (in addition to the obvious blindness to damage). If a spell is strong on its own, it gets compared to the most powerful spells that exist, often even spells of higher level, and is usually excused because lol magic: True Strike doesn't immediately put people to sleep and allow a coup-de-grace, so clearly it's not actually powerful compared to Sleep. Instead True Strike is a combo piece, and if you put together a combo that just means you've "earned" whatever result you get, which was totally fully intended by the designers (nevermind that the designers who wrote the second half of your combo are probably completely different from those who wrote True Strike). No, it doesn't do anything on its own- it just lets you do something that you clearly couldn't have done before, for a tiny, tiny cost. And then people print more ways to ignore that cost, like Circlet of Rapid Casting, or Artificer, or Metamagic Wand Grips, or Arcane Fusion, or Arcane Spellsurge, or. . .

And of course, True Strike mostly enables either a single big Power Attack hit on the weapon attack side, which is "just damage," or a blasting spell hit, which is "just damage," or a non-blasting spell hit, which "was a touch attack so it's assumed to always hit anyway." There's actually a funny bit where Scorching Ray, normally the primary offender in the creep of no-save damage for all of 3.5, is itself actually not a great combo with True Strike due to the multiple attack rolls (the uber orbs of course require only one, thus True Strike). Or it can be compared to spending two turns casting level appropriate damage spells, ignoring how this is a single 1st level spell with full effect at CL 1.

The biggest response so far is clearly "it's a standard action," and sure, it is. Until you quicken it (quite possibly for free), or you have a round where you're not in range or are blocked from affecting your foe but expect you will be next turn, which can happen accidentally far more than people realize and be set up intentionally with ease via the many BFC spells.

In short: people don't think it's overpowered because their power level is higher than yours, and char-op culture tends to make excuses for any and every RAW combo, because the whole point of char-op is finding those combos- their expected power level is defined by them.

If a spell is so powerful that a character will still find it useful even if cut in half, or had its level massively increased, or standard consumable forms become no-brainers that everyone should have available if they can use them, yes, those are indicators the spell might be too powerful. As written in the DMG, if something is so powerful that every character who can should have it (and this applies to True Strike unless you deliberately avoid every spell that requires an attack roll), yes, it might be too powerful (ignore when people immediately try to reducto ad absurdum this obvious definition of the word "balance"). True Strike could easily be cut to +10, and still virtually guarantee a hit at the level it's introduced, or for single touch spells later. It could be kicked up to 3rd level (or 4th, maybe even 5th), and people that want the effect would still have use for it at that level, if you never told them it was originally 1st for them to complain about the "nerf," they would just recognize it as more specialized instead of a gimme. The same sort of changes can be made to plenty of OP core spells, including defensive spells people will really push back on because it's "just defense"- you should see what happens when I recommend nerfing Shield and Mage Armor (just a bit so they don't make a mockery of the entire armor system, and they freak out).


And of course, there is the final solution. If it's not appropriate as written and people want to whine about the bonus you're willing to allow, just "ban" it entirely, remove the problem. The concept of the spell, spending a standard action and a spell to virtually guarantee a hit on your next turn, is very basic, and might not be appropriate for all games even in concept even if you squashed all the combo bugs. If it's entirely unfixable then good riddance.

[loky1109]

The often thought of "broken" form of true strike is using the custom magic item creation rules to just make an item of perpetual true strike. Due to the spell's effect, instead of giving +20 to hit on each attack roll, this would only give a +20 to your next attack roll after spending a standard action to activate the item, but it would last until you made an attack..

There are knight order in my setting, that using true strike swords, but... This swords will crumble into dust after single strike.

[Beni-Kujaku]

Secondly: people don't think it's overpowered because there's a certain blindness to combos (in addition to the obvious blindness to damage). If a spell is strong on its own, it gets compared to the most powerful spells that exist, often even spells of higher level, and is usually excused because lol magic: True Strike doesn't immediately put people to sleep and allow a coup-de-grace, so clearly it's not actually powerful compared to Sleep. Or it can be compared to spending two turns casting level appropriate damage spells, ignoring how this is a single 1st level spell with full effect at CL 1.

The biggest response so far is clearly "it's a standard action," and sure, it is. Until you quicken it (quite possibly for free), or you have a round where you're not in range or are blocked from affecting your foe but expect you will be next turn, which can happen accidentally far more than people realize and be set up intentionally with ease via the many BFC spells.

In short: people don't think it's overpowered because their power level is higher than yours, and char-op culture tends to make excuses for any and every RAW combo, because the whole point of char-op is finding those combos- their expected power level is defined by them.

These are indeed legitimate concerns for some "pretty good but not quite as good as others" spells. However, it doesn't apply to True Strike. Because True Strike is really bad, even compared to other spells that are far from the best. Rynjin didn't compare it to casting two level-appropriate spells, but to casting one magic missile, or just other blastings like shocking grasp, if you wanna get in melee. A wizard or sorcerer's attacks are just not that impressive, and auto-hitting on one of them just isn't that good. And yes, touch attacks are not going to hit always, but it will almost always hit at the very least 50% of the time, and that means just casting twice is almost always better than casting true strike and risking to just not be able to act because the fight finished in this one round.

And if you say "you have to quicken it", that means you're at least level 9. At this level, touch attacks will hit even more often, your melee attacks will be even more underwhelming compared to your spells (especially 5th level spells), and you'll have even more options to quicken that are much better, like just buffing the fighter of the party, or just simply magic missile, once again.

People don't think Magic Missile, or Flaming Sphere or Greater Magic Weapon are overpowered because their power level is higher than yours. People don't think True Strike is good because the spell is bad.

[Darg]

Well ok, there is another situation where it can be extremely helpful: when you can't see the target and someone is able to point out which square they are in. You would blindly swing into the square and the spell basically guarantees that the strike/touch succeeds.

The spell is not terrible. It's actually really good at what it does. The problem is getting access to it when it would be beneficial. The optimization necessary to actually break the balance of the game with the spell is pretty difficult and highly specialized. And let's be real here, how often does a character need that +20 in order to be even effective? Players already have a 1 in 20 swings auto true strike effect built into the game.

[Mechalich]

True strike (or at least a silent version of it) is nice for assassins. If you spend all that time setting up the death attack, it would be a shame to then miss with it.

Really it's nicely paired with any sort of opening attack, whether that's an actual physical attack or a spell that's a touch attack. It's not a bad spell to cast in the round immediately prior to attacking, assuming that's something the party has control over (they often won't) and other persistent buffs have already been applied. It's particularly helpful to pair with an attack carrying a SoS or SoD effect, including mundane sources of such effects like poison.

A Wand of True Strike is therefore a useful item to have around, especially for anyone trying to take advantage of flat-footed enemies, since it really sucks to miss with that opening sneak attack, and also for similar pick-your-battles kind of dramatic moments when it's very important not to miss - like say, starting a battle in the king's court by Disintegrating the king.

However, True Strike is fundamentally about getting to ignore the RNG for a single attack. High-optimization games are generally built around ignoring the RNG as a matter of course - usually by boosting beyond it - and therefore True Strike loses all value.

[Darg]

However, True Strike is fundamentally about getting to ignore the RNG for a single attack. High-optimization games are generally built around ignoring the RNG as a matter of course - usually by boosting beyond it - and therefore True Strike loses all value.

I wouldn't say it loses all value, it is a first level spell after all that does allow you to bypass concealment miss chance. If you have persistent spell and a free 7th level slot, you could cast it the night before and benefit from it on your first attack of the day.

[Rebel7284]

True Strike is a unique spell with some niche use, so it's good to keep in mind that it exists. However, most of the time, just using True Strike without a specific plan is not a good return on investment on a first level slot.

I understand the temptation to value auto-hitting, my second character ever was a gish with a ton of to-hit bonuses. However, I recognized quickly that while hitting was nice, my damage rolls were not doing very much. The same idea applies to True Strike. Certain builds do benefit from Quickened True Strike + [Tome of Battle] strike or Arcane Fusion with True Strike + Orb of X, but most of the time, actions are too valuable to use a buff that only affects you for one attack.

[Maat Mons]

It's important not to have a knee-jerk reaction to big numbers. Here's a fun thought exercise that illustrates why. Imagine if True Strike gave a +2,000 bonus instead of a +20 bonus. How much better would it be? Well, a +20 bonus gives you a 95% chance to hit, and a +2,000 bonus gives you... a 95% chance to hit. Once you pass the threshold of "enough," more isn't better.

Anyway, the litmus test to determine if something is overpowered is "does it cause problems in-game?" So, has anyone observed True Strike causing problems?

If you do decide to nerf it, the question you need to ask is "how much can I scale this back before people stop using it." Personally, I've never seen anyone use True Strike. That doesn't seem to bode well for people using a nerfed version of it, but maybe my experience is atypical.

[Rynjin]

Now, a fun way to rework True Strike so it's not completely useless, try using the Psionic version instead.

Inevitable Strike (https://www.d20pfsrd.com/alternative-rule-systems/psionics-unleashed/psionic-powers/i/inevitable-strike/) can be cast as a Swift for a +5 (and ignore concealment.

Alternately, it can be cast as normal True Strike for a bit of extra PP, or have the bonus jacked but keep Swift action cast by pumping PP into it, making it the equivalent of a 5th level spell to get a +20 bonus as a Swift action (same as Quickened True Strike).

This sidesteps the "big numbers are scary" issue while actually making the spell usable.

If you just want a solid 1st level spell...+5 to your next attack roll as a Swift is pretty good, and makes a great spell for Paladins and such to have access to.

[Quertus]

I've seen people try to use True Strike, and… the results were underwhelming.

There's even a +1 bow with True Strike at will, and it's… just not worth the action economy lost to use it.

If your table finds True Strike overpowered in actual play, your players are either really bad at math, really crazy crafty, or your table is so low-op that playing there would cause the average Playgrounder to suffer d4 sanity loss. :smallwink:

[icefractal]

There's a few situations it's useful for, but they're pretty niche.
Ambushing - although with a one round duration and a verbal component, this only works for certain types of ambushes.
Sniping - True Strike cancels the penalty for being at maximum range, and at that range probably nobody can hear you cast it. But it's still just a single opening shot. And long-range combat is rare in D&D because it leaves the rest of the party twiddling their thumbs.

I played a character that was basically the best case scenario for True Strike (a gestalt Diviner/Desperado who used spells for investigation and buffing and relied on a rifle for offense), and I did prepare it (for that sniping scenario) and I still don't think I ever cast it.

[Segev]

Maybe it is something an arcane hierophant could make hse of with his animal companion familiar. Familiars share spells, so you could cast it and your animal companion familiar attack with it in the same round.

[Mechalich]

Thinking on it, True Strike can actually be used to improve the action economy - by bringing a hit chance that's below 50% up to an effective 50%.

Now, that's not useful for a PC, since any single attack standard action by a PC should be at well above 50% in almost all cases, but there's a wide range of potential minions to which that would apply.

[Malphegor]

It’s great when you can get it as a free action. Runecaster applying it as a permament touch activated rune on the handle of every weapon, activating each round so long as the wielder is touching the rune.

And it doesn’t even seem that silly or metagamey to have on at all times on a weapon, that’s pretty standard fantasy magic weapon enhancement: ‘the sword of truth that always strikes true’ from Disney’s adaptation of Sleeping Beauty for example.


But otherwise it’s costing a standard action for a bonus that might not be needed depending on dice roll, and doesn’t make things any deader faster.

[Calthropstu]

It can be used in conjunction with combat maneuvers. A +20 to disarm an opponent taking away their main schtick if you are going for capture? Steal the bbeg wizard's uber headband before running away?

[pabelfly]

It can be used in conjunction with combat maneuvers. A +20 to disarm an opponent taking away their main schtick if you are going for capture? Steal the bbeg wizard's uber headband before running away?

I don't know, you'd better have a really good plan on what you're doing when the BBEG gets their turn with you right in front of them and having just antagonised them.

[Calthropstu]

I don't know, you'd better have a really good plan on what you're doing when the BBEG gets their turn with you right in front of them and having just antagonised them.


Hmmmm. I suppose "Oh my god it's the tarrasque" as you do it is insufficient?

Though I suppose having wizard ally cast dimension door after you do it is a good idea.

[Xervous]

Hmmmm. I suppose "Oh my god it's the tarrasque" as you do it is insufficient?

Though I suppose having wizard ally cast dimension door after you do it is a good idea.

You need to pick something scary. Big T is only an acceptable answer if it’s the BBEG’s ex-wife.

[Asmotherion]

it is quite powerful (for example, if you're up against something with decent touch AC), but I'd say not overpowered, as it is rare that a caster would need to perform a non-touch attack.

[Ramza00]

There are many use for actions such as targeting fort, ref, will, touch ac, spell resistance, battlefield control, buffs, etc.

But let’s hyper focus on ac whether ranged or melee.

If you roll a dice and you hit on a 11 with your d20 that’s means you have a 50/50 shot of hitting without true strike. Thus it is not beneficial at all to use true strike as a wizard or a similar caster and just risk random number generation. This is because it takes two standard actions to cast true strike then attack, and with one standard action you have a 50/50 shot, with two standard actions you have 25% to do twice the damage, 50% to do once the damage, and 25% to miss both times.

Etc, etc.

True Strike becomes more valuable if the enemy has a higher ac and thus you need to roll higher than a 11 to hit, or if the enemy has concealment, miss chance, etc.

True Strike’s true cost is not the 1st level spell slot, or a wand for 750 gp with 50 charges. It is instead the standard action to cast it, waisting actions that can be used for other things.

[farothel]

There was a module I played once where an adversary used it to win an archery tournament (it was up to the players to try to catch him casting it as it was forbidden to use spells).

Other than that, indeed, using it right before you ambush someone (or similar set-ups where you control the pace of the action) is not necessarily a bad thing, but in a regular combat, I've never seen it used as it indeed takes too long to set-up.

In PF2 I've been using it. There it's different in that you can roll your attack twice and take the better result (without getting a bonus), also ignoring concealment. I was a ranger-wizard and I used it when I really had to hit, as it was a 1-action spell, leaving me 2 actions for attacking.

[Toliudar]

I don't think that another niche use for True Strike has been addressed: use by NPC's, usually against the players.

PC's have to worry about marshalling a variety of resources (spell slots, gold, actions) to be effective. NPC's don't. So how to make a cohort of low-level archers more of a threat to a mid-level party? Give them all cheap potions of True Strike, so that at least their first shot is likely to have some effect. Need that one hail-mary bowshot from a distance that slices through a rope and starts the death machine in motion? Need an NPC that can act like a defensive lineman and bull-rush the first fighter off the bridge?

True Strike is great for characters who don't need to be consistently effective, just very reliably good once. And you don't have to make it an un-level playing field - if the PC's capture a wand of True Strike, or ten potions of it, good for them! As has been established above, the benefit is sometimes good, sometimes marginal, rarely game-breaking and (in the case of single-use magic items) probably held onto for crucial moments - times when you WANT the players to have a special oomph anyway.

[MaxiDuRaritry]

I don't think that another niche use for True Strike has been addressed: use by NPC's, usually against the players.

PC's have to worry about marshalling a variety of resources (spell slots, gold, actions) to be effective. NPC's don't. So how to make a cohort of low-level archers more of a threat to a mid-level party? Give them all cheap potions of True Strike, so that at least their first shot is likely to have some effect. Need that one hail-mary bowshot from a distance that slices through a rope and starts the death machine in motion? Need an NPC that can act like a defensive lineman and bull-rush the first fighter off the bridge?

True Strike is great for characters who don't need to be consistently effective, just very reliably good once. And you don't have to make it an un-level playing field - if the PC's capture a wand of True Strike, or ten potions of it, good for them! As has been established above, the benefit is sometimes good, sometimes marginal, rarely game-breaking and (in the case of single-use magic items) probably held onto for crucial moments - times when you WANT the players to have a special oomph anyway.Point of order: true strike can't be made into potions, because it's self-only.

There are ways to give castings to others -- such as via a spell-storing weapon or via runecasting or a spell trap or a StP erudite with the soul crystal power -- but not potions.

[Beni-Kujaku]

I don't think that another niche use for True Strike has been addressed: use by NPC's, usually against the players.

Now I'm picturing a city attacked by an old red dragon, completely invulnerable to everything except siege weapons, and then you have a squadron of two hundreds level 1 wizards who come up with plain old crossbows. The leader shouts an order, and they all cast Magic Weapon as one, lighting all the crossbows like stars in the sea of flame that the city has become. Another order, and another two words uttered by two hundreds mouths at once. True Strike. The magic illuminates two hundreds pair of eyes as they all know exactly where their next shot should go. By now, the dragon has figured something was happening, and with a quick breath kills a few dozens of them. But too late. Two hundreds crossbows fire at once. The hide of the dragon is impenetrable, but somehow the arrows seem to always hit exactly between the scales, in the dragon's eyes, or under its claws. 40% of the arrows hit their mark. 80d8 points of damage. The great creatures falls down, struck down by the power of an united city.

[smasher0404]

There are many use for actions such as targeting fort, ref, will, touch ac, spell resistance, battlefield control, buffs, etc.

But let’s hyper focus on ac whether ranged or melee.

If you roll a dice and you hit on a 11 with your d20 that’s means you have a 50/50 shot of hitting without true strike. Thus it is not beneficial at all to use true strike as a wizard or a similar caster and just risk random number generation. This is because it takes two standard actions to cast true strike then attack, and with one standard action you have a 50/50 shot, with two standard actions you have 25% to do twice the damage, 50% to do once the damage, and 25% to miss both times.

Etc, etc.

True Strike becomes more valuable if the enemy has a higher ac and thus you need to roll higher than a 11 to hit, or if the enemy has concealment, miss chance, etc.

True Strike’s true cost is not the 1st level spell slot, or a wand for 750 gp with 50 charges. It is instead the standard action to cast it, waisting actions that can be used for other things.

I'd argue that especially at lower levels, spell slot/gp cost is a notable concern when it comes to casting spells. If you have limited spell slots for the attack you're going to use, True Strike is going to be a lot better option even with the ~5% damage loss (from the chance of rolling a Nat 1) in the Needed Roll = 11 case.

In addition, at lower levels, the damage loss is going to be fairly minimal in reality, a Caster Level 5 Shocking Grasp (aka a maxed out 1st level spell) deals an average of 17.5 (3.5*5) damage on a hit. That means casting it twice in the Needed Roll = 11 case has an expected damage of 17.5. The True Strike'd Shocking Grasp has an expected damage of 16.625 (17.5*0.95). That's a damage loss of about a singular point of damage at the same action economy and spell slot cost. If you know that you'd use True Strike on the same AC-targeting spell every time, then preparing it twice is obviously the better plan. However, if you just know you will want to use *an* AC-targeting spell twice on the same target, without knowing which one, True Strike provides a bit more versatility in you're preparation for some small damage loss.

[Jay R]

And it doesn’t even seem that silly or metagamey to have on at all times on a weapon, that’s pretty standard fantasy magic weapon enhancement: ‘the sword of truth that always strikes true’ from Disney’s adaptation of Sleeping Beauty for example.

Excuse the correction of a trivial error: Prince Philip's sword in Disney's Sleeping Beauty doesn't always strike true. He swings it several times, either missing or hitting for no effect. In the final attack, Flora, Fauna, and Merryweather cast a spell on it with the verbal component:

"Now sword of truth, fly swift and sure
That evil die, and good endure."

Back to the issue: in most games, this spell does not successfully over-power most encounters. It's a useful niche spell, and I've occasionally used it. But I don't think I've ever memorized it twice in one day.

[Psyren]

1) It's a bit more useful in PF - all maneuvers (CMB checks) are attack rolls, so you effectively get to guarantee a single disarm, sunder, grapple, trip, dirty trick etc. As those can have ramifications that last longer than a round, you can effectively trade one of your rounds for more than one of theirs. I love the flavor too, as the spell is essentially guiding you to the perfect strike to use against the target.

2) Magi can use it as part of Spell Combat, letting you do the above and attack in the same round.

3) Alchemists can hand them out to the party (via Infusion), or even just impart them directly in others (e.g. Touch Injection).

[RNightstalker]

And it doesn’t even seem that silly or metagamey to have on at all times on a weapon, that’s pretty standard fantasy magic weapon enhancement: ‘the sword of truth that always strikes true’ from Disney’s adaptation of Sleeping Beauty for example.


Mentioning my favorite Disney movie does get you brownie points.


It can be used in conjunction with combat maneuvers. A +20 to disarm an opponent taking away their main schtick if you are going for capture? Steal the bbeg wizard's uber headband before running away?

I don't think that another niche use for True Strike has been addressed: use by NPC's, usually against the players.

PC's have to worry about marshalling a variety of resources (spell slots, gold, actions) to be effective. NPC's don't. So how to make a cohort of low-level archers more of a threat to a mid-level party? Give them all cheap potions of True Strike, so that at least their first shot is likely to have some effect. Need that one hail-mary bowshot from a distance that slices through a rope and starts the death machine in motion? Need an NPC that can act like a defensive lineman and bull-rush the first fighter off the bridge?


Thanks to you both...I'm working on updating dragon mountain to 3.x and y'all just ended up pissing off a bunch of PC's!:biggrin:


You need to pick something scary. Big T is only an acceptable answer if it’s the BBEG’s ex-wife.

Post of the day!


Excuse the correction of a trivial error: Prince Philip's sword in Disney's Sleeping Beauty doesn't always strike true. He swings it several times, either missing or hitting for no effect. In the final attack, Flora, Fauna, and Merryweather cast a spell on it with the verbal component:

"Now sword of truth, fly swift and sure
That evil die, and good endure."

Back to the issue: in most games, this spell does not successfully over-power most encounters. It's a useful niche spell, and I've occasionally used it. But I don't think I've ever memorized it twice in one day.

So what did they enchant his sword with? Sword of Slaying instead of arrow seems most likely. And yes, brownie points for you too!

[AceDragonKing]

I have seen a build that used it. It got a quick version and the purpose was to make absurd bull rush attacks, knocking enemies 100 feet. It was paired with a ranger for some serious tactic advantage.

please sir, might i know some more?

[Calthropstu]

please sir, might i know some more?

I didn't see the actual sheet, was a fellow player. It was 13th lvl in a pf game and he would stack numerous bonus to get insane bullrushes basically launching our enemies and forcing them to run back. I, our druid, would cast entangle and spike stones to create difficult terrain and their melee would just be screwed. And in the back was a bow ranger launching arrows. It did pretty well.

He got to 40 str for +15, somehow added another ability score, something that specifically added to bull rush, and of course feats. His bonus before true strike was around +60.

[Rynjin]

At the point you're casting Quickened True Strike for Bull Rush, why not just cast Force Punch?

[MaxiDuRaritry]

At the point you're casting Quickened True Strike for Bull Rush, why not just cast Force Punch?"I cast fist!"

[Calthropstu]

At the point you're casting Quickened True Strike for Bull Rush, why not just cast Force Punch?

Take a look. 5 feet per 2 caster levels? This guy is getting 20 extra feet on a schtick he already has. Even barbarians are going flying with those numbers. That spell is ultra weak sauce compared to an 80-100 combat maneuver, and there's no saving throw.

And the gm once decided to have bridge combat. He regretted it instantly as the first victim went flying 70 feet. And the next. And the next...

7 prone fighters later and the use of a black tentacles scroll... (had to umd it)

[Rynjin]

The spell does damage, and under most circumstances 20 feet = 100 feet in terms of how much it impacts an enemy (denying actions). It's also two spell levels lower.

TBH I'm also doubting the static +80 to Bull Rush in the first place, unless you guys were like level 20 or something.

I also don't think you get 100 feet with a 100 unless their CMD is 0 somehow.

[Psyren]

I find the math suspect too, but at least true strike has no save or SR to deal with. Swings and roundabouts.

[Pherick]

First off, a +20 bonus for a 1st level spell?!?!?!

Secondly, it's an insight bonus so it will stack with most everything else as they're not too common.

Thirdly, its on ANY attack roll: ranged, melee, touch.

Has anyone else nerfed this at their table?
Would having it give a smaller bonus that gives additional bonuses at higher levels be more appropriate, like +1 to start and an additional +1 for every two caster levels?

My friend ran a dwarf wizard years ago with this spell and a dward war axe

[Calthropstu]

I find the math suspect too, but at least true strike has no save or SR to deal with. Swings and roundabouts.

13th level full bab. 13
Full feat chain +6
Item giving flat +6 on bull rush (may have been custom)
40 str. +15
Trait bonus for +1
+20 for true strike
+1-20 from the die.

I knew that much.Not sure where the other 20 came from but there's up to 81 right there. There may have been multiple items. I just distinctly remember 1 giving him +6 because I identified it.

[Psyren]

Was he a barbarian? And a custom item would certainly qualify as "suspect."

Also, generally when someone says "I have +60 to the check" they mean before the die rather than assuming a 20, in common parlance anyway.

[JNAProductions]

So, checking the numbers on that...

In Pathfinder, you push the target back 5' plus 5' per five points you exceeded their CMD. You need to beat their CMD to succeed on the Bull Rush, of course. You're also limited to at most one size category larger than yourself, unless there's a feat or something to remove that (probable, but I don't know off-hand).

I grabbed a couple of random CR 11 monsters to compare. CR 11 seemed reasonable to me for foes you might encounter in decent number, but also be an individual threat. Numbers below are BEFORE True Strike.

Taotieh (https://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/monster-listings/constructs/taotieh) has a CMD of 37. So it'd be pushed back 10' even on a nat 1.
Giant Emperor Scorpion (https://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/monster-listings/vermin/scorpion/scorpion-giant-emperor) would need to bypass the size limit to push at all. Assuming the size limit is bypassed, with a CMD of 37 again... Same deal.
Elder Gravity Elemental (https://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/monster-listings/outsiders/elemental/elemental-gravity-tohc/gravity-elemental-elder-tohc) has a much higher CMD of 48. You'd need a 7 on die to match their CMD and push them even 5', and a nat 20 only gets you 15'. Plus, it's Huge, so size limit.
Cryohydra (10-Headed) (https://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/monster-listings/magical-beasts/hydra/cryohydra/cryohydra-10-headed) has a relatively pathetic CMD of 27. So it's pushed back 20' even on a nat 1.

So it seems reasonable that it'd work against a decent number of foes (assuming you can bypass size limits).

[Psyren]

In Pathfinder, you push the target back 5' plus 5' per five points you exceeded their CMD. You need to beat their CMD to succeed on the Bull Rush, of course. You're also limited to at most one size category larger than yourself, unless there's a feat or something to remove that (probable, but I don't know off-hand).

Poised Bearing / Imposing Bearing, as well as one or two items

[Calthropstu]

Was he a barbarian? And a custom item would certainly qualify as "suspect."

Also, generally when someone says "I have +60 to the check" they mean before the die rather than assuming a 20, in common parlance anyway.

Fair, but it was the gm giving it to him so eh?

Plus I think he was half giant.

In addition,, he was at +80. He was regularly saying numbers in the 90s, and would occasionally announce 100! excitedly. I think I may just try to rebuild his character and see how far I can push this...

pun intended.

[King of Nowhere]

my party barbarian once made good use of true strike by becoming runescarred berserker (a prc that advances most barbarian stuff while giving access to some arcane spells) and buying a lesser wand of quicken. Playing in a low-op game, where shock trooper was explicitly banned (before complaining that melee classes need no nerfs, be assured that casters also were much restricted; coupled with the barbarian being the most skilled player, the casters actually needed help to stay relevant), he could quicken true strike and make a charge with full power attack and still hit.
And it was a huge power up over the normal melee level of that campaign, where power attack would carry a real risk of missing.

But even then, true strike was not overpowered.
1) it required a specific build to support it, with many resources devoted to the trick.
2) it was only effective because the table restricted other, more powerful tricks that would have made this strategy moot
3) even when it worked, it meant +60 damage on a charge at level 20. A strong number, certainly, but not game-breaking.
4) it only worked on charges; on full attack, true strike does not apply to iteratives, and you're generally better off trying to hit with some of those too.

[Elves]

It's OP in combo with arcane fusion. That's what happens when you use action cost as a way of balancing a large numerical effect and then offer a way to circumvent action cost. So true strike, while balanced in Core, is probably the kind of effect you shouldn't include in a game with content inflation because as soon as something upsets the delicate balance set around it, it gets far better.

[Psyren]

It's OP in combo with arcane fusion. That's what happens when you use action cost as a way of balancing a large numerical effect and then offer a way to circumvent action cost. So true strike, while balanced in Core, is probably the kind of effect you shouldn't include in a game with content inflation because as soon as something upsets the delicate balance set around it, it gets far better.

Eh, Magi can beat the action cost at level 1 and it's still fine. The biggest balancer for it isn't the action cost, it's the fact that it only applies to one attack.

[Elves]

Eh, Magi can beat the action cost at level 1 and it's still fine. The biggest balancer for it isn't the action cost, it's the fact that it only applies to one attack.
shivering touch is the classic choice, though to be fair most low dex monsters will have a low enough touch AC that it doesn't matter.

[Psyren]

Shivering Touch is overpowered to be sure, but that has nothing to do with True Strike.

[Calthropstu]

Eh, Magi can beat the action cost at level 1 and it's still fine. The biggest balancer for it isn't the action cost, it's the fact that it only applies to one attack.

Yeah. You could cast it 1000 times in a single round. What you would get as a result is:

This attack has +20 insight bonus.
This attack has +20 insight bonus. Doesn't stack with previous insight bonus *999

[Elves]

with fusion it equates to a +1 metamagic to autohit with any weaponlike spell of 7th level or lower.
not free, but probably excessive?

[Psyren]

Aren't most of those touch attacks? They practically autohit anyway.

Weapon attacks are where this would be most valuable, and even then, the riders tend to be pretty weak. Doesn't work with Vorpal, doesn't work with called shots, poisons suck, diseases suck, etc etc.

Even for the Magus, who can get pretty powerful riders on their weapon attacks thanks to Spellstrike, you're giving up something much more impactful if you're trying to stick True Strike in your spell combat instead. At level 1, I know I'd rather have swing with a +3 shocking grasp than a +20 white hit (to borrow Diablo terminology).

Maneuvers as noted change the math however, provided you're trying to do something other than damage.

[Segev]

Aren't most of those touch attacks? They practically autohit anyway.

Weapon attacks are where this would be most valuable, and even then, the riders tend to be pretty weak. Doesn't work with Vorpal, doesn't work with called shots, poisons suck, diseases suck, etc etc.

Even for the Magus, who can get pretty powerful riders on their weapon attacks thanks to Spellstrike, you're giving up something much more impactful if you're trying to stick True Strike in your spell combat instead. At level 1, I know I'd rather have swing with a +3 shocking grasp than a +20 white hit (to borrow Diablo terminology).

Maneuvers as noted change the math however, provided you're trying to do something other than damage.

I think you probably want to use chill touch and then true strike so you can get multiple rounds from chill touch's multiple touches. (This is, of course, controversial, because chill touch's exact implementation is controversial.)

On Vorpal, though, true strike helps because it'll help with the confirmation. (After all, you probably auto-hit on the critical threat.)

[Particle_Man]

Can you use true strike between the hit and the critical threat confirmation? If not how does true strike help with vorpal since you need, not just a confirmed hit, or even a confirmed critical threat, but a natural 20 on the attack roll, followed by a conformation of the critical hit?

[loky1109]

Can you use true strike between the hit and the critical threat confirmation?

No. There is no "between".

[Darg]

No. There is no "between".

Not that it matters, the critical roll gets the same modifiers as the original attack roll.

[Segev]

Not that it matters, the critical roll gets the same modifiers as the original attack roll.

Exactly. It helps you confirm because the modifier is still in effect because it is part of the same attack roll.

[Particle_Man]

So the idea is you cast true strike, have some independent method of getting a guaranteed natural 20, then get an easy confirmation of the critical threat?

Or is the idea to spam true strike a lot (with every melee attack with the vorpal weapon, perhaps), and getting the benefit of a greatly increased chance of decapitation on one in twenty castings of true strike?

[Rynjin]

With a Cyclops Helm you COULD once per day guaranteed kill a guy...assuming your GM lets you buy a Cyclops Helm lmao.

[RNightstalker]

I think I may just try to rebuild his character and see how far I can push this...

And you have today's post of the day! Congratulations! You win...me keeping an eye our for more hilarious one liners lol.

[BobertTheThird]

The only way I can possibly see this as broken is a character with sneak attack using UMD with a Wand of Truestrike to ensure their assassination works the first time. Even then players finding themselves in situations where they can do so is rare, because players will rarely get the drop on the enemy when at least one of them will be so loud they might as well announce their presence to the enemy with trumpets. There are potentially other surprise round benefits, but at best it is one guaranteed hit, and then for the rest of the combat you'll never use it. This is because the chance to get 2 hits, averaging 1 hit (even with the possibility of zero hits), is better than getting strictly 1 hit over 2 rounds. And if that player is getting more than 1 attacks a round, then True strike is absolutely useless.

The way I see it, True strike has two uses, surprise round guaranteed hits, and oh fudge the DM gave the enemy godly AC and we can't hit it. The first doesn't change game balance much, since if the party can manage to get the surprise round, they're already highly favored by the rules (a guaranteed hit isn't going to change that), and honestly if the party can manage that and continue to remain hidden while a player casts true strike before attacking, then they deserve that guaranteed hit. The second is to overcome careless or vindictive DMs, and thus absolutely necessary to game balance.

Mid-combat use will always be a poor use of True-strike due to the loss of a round, and in an appropriate CR encounter, you'll average more damage output without wasting that round.

[Rynjin]

True Strike doesn't even work with Assassinate or Death Attack unless it's Quickened, since you spend your Standard actions for a round or three beforehand to set it up.

[Particle_Man]

I wonder what level a version of true strike that was a swift action that applied to a full attack made that round or next round would be?

[BobertTheThird]

True Strike doesn't even work with Assassinate or Death Attack unless it's Quickened, since you spend your Standard actions for a round or three beforehand to set it up.

Sorry I was meaning assassinate in the sense of doing massive damage with a sneak attack or spell, not in the sense of the ability, I should've specified.

[MR_Anderson]

True Strike is not overpowered as a spell to cast.

Even in a game where the DM allowed called shots, and thus my character would place an arrow in the knee of anyone trying to escape, as my character was mainly a useless caster who didn’t have offensive spells.

I found more than 5% of my spells wasted as I rolled a 1 more than 1 out of 20 rolls. The most we could hope for on called shots was usually limiting movement speed.

However, I did craft a pair of gauntlets for our Paladin. I gave him 3 True Strikes per Day, a +5 to his Charisma for 3 Minutes per Day, and a few other small things.

He used a 2-Handed Greatsword with extra damage and then Power Attack and Smite Evil.

He was a power house if he got into melee for at least 3 attacks. Something evil was usually dying.

This all came at the cost of Gold and my character’s XP to better our party. Multiple Targets still provided problems, and even the Paladin rolled 1’s with those Gauntlets of Splendid Holiness!

I also carried a quicken True Strike for certain touch spells, because why not?

Concentration, Rolling a 1, and many other things can stop the spell easily.

[Particle_Man]

True Strike doesn't even work with Assassinate or Death Attack unless it's Quickened, since you spend your Standard actions for a round or three beforehand to set it up.

Well you have three more rounds after the study to make the death attack, so it could go:

Rounds 1-3: study opponent (hopefully while hidden and/or invisible)
Round 4: (silent?) True Strike
Round 5: Death Attack!!!! Oh, you made the Fort save?
Round 6: Run Away!!!! :smallsmile:

[RNightstalker]

I wonder what level a version of true strike that was a swift action that applied to a full attack made that round or next round would be?

Wraithstrike is a 2nd level spell that almost does the same...how many people have banned that spell?

[Darg]

Wraithstrike is a 2nd level spell that almost does the same...how many people have banned that spell?

Wraithstrike may not need to be banned, but a custom magic item that gives a continuous effect for only 48,000 should be.

[RandomPeasant]

Wraithstrike is a 2nd level spell that almost does the same...how many people have banned that spell?

wraithstrike's effect is smaller than a +20 bonus until fairly high level, and even then it's possible to have defenses it's not very effective against (high DEX + low size, scintillating scales, that sort of thing). A flat bonus would be much more powerful. And wraithstrike does get some ban talk, as a spell that's fairly often used as a part of the buff routines Gishes use to beat Fighters at their own game (Persistent wraithstrike is really, really good).

[Vaern]

Now I'm picturing a city attacked by an old red dragon, completely invulnerable to everything except siege weapons, and then you have a squadron of two hundreds level 1 wizards who come up with plain old crossbows. The leader shouts an order, and they all cast Magic Weapon as one, lighting all the crossbows like stars in the sea of flame that the city has become. Another order, and another two words uttered by two hundreds mouths at once. True Strike. The magic illuminates two hundreds pair of eyes as they all know exactly where their next shot should go. By now, the dragon has figured something was happening, and with a quick breath kills a few dozens of them. But too late. Two hundreds crossbows fire at once. The hide of the dragon is impenetrable, but somehow the arrows seem to always hit exactly between the scales, in the dragon's eyes, or under its claws. 40% of the arrows hit their mark. 80d8 points of damage. The great creatures falls down, struck down by the power of an united city.
If the dragon is meant to be taken down with siege weapons, there's nothing stopping you from using magic weapon and true strike to snipe the dragon with a trebuchet. I once had an NPC follower that I had from leadership use true strike with a ballista against a kraken before.

[Maat Mons]

I had a detailed response written up to the red dragon scenario, but it looks like I never posted it. I'll try to remember what I wrote.

I definitely spent a while musing on the use of Gnome Calculuses instead of crossbows. The Wizards would all be taking a -4 nonproficiency penalty, but they'd be targeting a mere 8 touch AC, so totally worth it. With such a low AC, True Strike could instead be used to overcome a range penalty, such as the -9 from using the Calculuses from 500 feet away.

The use of energy damage from alchemical items would negate the need for Magic Weapon to overcome DR. Though this strategy could be screwed over if the dragon comes into battle pre-buffed with Resist Energy. A red dragon is already immune to Alchemist's Fire. Cold is their obvious weak point, which means they're more likely to defend against it, so Alchemist's Frost may not be a good bet. That still leaves Acid and Alchemist's Shock.

Maybe it would be a good idea for every city to have a squad of Calculators on hand to deal with tough enemies.



I hadn't thought of siege engines, but now that you mention it, Heroes of Battle has siege-engine ammunition that works like really big versions of Acid or Alchemist's Fire. You could deal 2d6 acid damage per hit from 1,500 away.



Of course, all this relies the dragon not taking appropriate precautions. If it casts Greater Invisibility, keeps moving around with its 200-foot fly speed, and only ever comes within 60 feet of the ground just long enough to use its breathe weapon every 1d4 rounds, fighting it with massed troops of low-level characters becomes even harder.

[RandomPeasant]

It also seems to be ignoring Frightful Presence. Getting your Wizards lined up when anyone within a couple hundred feat of it when it flies past has to make a DC "lol no" Will save or drop out of the fight is no easy feat. Especially since the Dragon's AC is high enough that if you keep the Wizards at range, they have a credible chance of missing even with true strike (assuming they are indeed wielding crossbows).

There's also the worthwhile point that if you have several hundred 1st level Wizards on hand, about the dumbest possible thing to do with them is figure out complicated schemes by which they can kill dragons. You should be training them into higher level Wizards, providing your nation with meaningful magical resources, not throwing them at some that has a passive ability that knocks them out of the fight.

[Darg]

I definitely spent a while musing on the use of Gnome Calculuses instead of crossbows. The Wizards would all be taking a -4 nonproficiency penalty, but they'd be targeting a mere 8 touch AC, so totally worth it. With such a low AC, True Strike could instead be used to overcome a range penalty, such as the -9 from using the Calculuses from 500 feet away.

It's a cumulative -2 per range increment so it would be -14 total with the nonproficiency at 500 ft.