My DM is using this homebrew version of True Strike - too powerful?

[sayaijin]

So my DM wanted to "fix" the cantrip True Strike, but I'm worried it is going to be too powerful.

He's made it a weapon attack cantrip like booming blade, but it works with any proficient weapon (even ranged) and it gives +1d4 to attack roll.

The part I'm worried about is where he's made it where it the d20+d4 is equal to or greater than 20, then he's treating the attack as a crit and the attack as magical. Then he's giving it the additional d4 at 5th, 11th, and 17th so 2d4, 3d4, and 4d4...seems like an auto crit at 17th level.

He's saying it's balanced because it's still only ever one attack and martials would prefer multiple attacks, but there's a guy who wants to play Rogue...

[Catullus64]

Umm... yeah, that extra crit thing sounds like a real problem. Especially with scaling.

That said, whether or not this homebrew works is really dependent on whether it changes some of the other things that make True Strike bad.

Does it still require Concentration?

Can you still only use it against a designated creature?

Is it still an action to cast?

Because if these things are still in play, it's still pretty bad, and the crit thing makes it only marginally better.

[Amnestic]

He's saying it's balanced because it's still only ever one attack and martials would prefer multiple attacks, but there's a guy who wants to play Rogue...

I'm pretty sure a paladin would also like to have a guaranteed crit for smites instead of rolling two attacks...

[PhantomSoul]

So my DM wanted to "fix" the cantrip True Strike, but I'm worried it is going to be too powerful.

He's made it a weapon attack cantrip like booming blade, but it works with any proficient weapon (even ranged) and it gives +1d4 to attack roll.

The part I'm worried about is where he's made it where it the d20+d4 is equal to or greater than 20, then he's treating the attack as a crit and the attack as magical. Then he's giving it the additional d4 at 5th, 11th, and 17th so 2d4, 3d4, and 4d4...seems like an auto crit at 17th level.

He's saying it's balanced because it's still only ever one attack and martials would prefer multiple attacks, but there's a guy who wants to play Rogue...

Is he looking for more players? xD

[Guy Lombard-O]

Is he looking for more players? xD

I think I'd play a PAM paladin, and pick up warcaster right quick.

[Doug Lampert]

I think I'd play a PAM paladin, and pick up warcaster right quick.

Making it a blade cantrip (usable with ranged attacks) that gives advantage on the attack and 1d6 (scaling at 5, 11, and 17) extra damage is my proposed fix. Much weaker than the DM's proposed fix, and I still think it would probably be too strong on a rogue (here, have an extra 1-4 dice of sneak attack for the low, low cost of not needing to find a source of advantage).

So, yes, I think the GM is correct that this is fine on a normal martial, but a rogue or paladin at tier 2-4 becomes a monster with this rule unless he nerfs sneak attack and smite dice to not double on a crit.

[sayaijin]

Umm... yeah, that extra crit thing sounds like a real problem. Especially with scaling.

That said, whether or not this homebrew works is really dependent on whether it changes some of the other things that make True Strike bad.

Does it still require Concentration?

Can you still only use it against a designated creature?

Is it still an action to cast?

Because if these things are still in play, it's still pretty bad, and the crit thing makes it only marginally better.

I realize I was ambiguous before. The cantrip under his rules would not give advantage. It only gives the bonus to-hit.

Since it's a blade cantrip, it is an action and doesn't require concentration or another turn to do. It's just like booming blade where you make an attack with a bonus. In this case, the bonus is to-hit/crit.

Also, Amnestic, I hadn't thought of taking paladin to abuse this rule. Good call!

No but seriously, I should tell him this is a bad idea because of rogues and paladins, right?
Should I recommend just taking off the crit part of the rule? Still give extra to-hit and magic damage, but no crit?

[nickl_2000]

I realize I was ambiguous before. The cantrip under his rules would not give advantage. It only gives the bonus to-hit.

Since it's a blade cantrip, it is an action and doesn't require concentration or another turn to do. It's just like booming blade where you make an attack with a bonus. In this case, the bonus is to-hit/crit.

Also, Amnestic, I hadn't thought of taking paladin to abuse this rule. Good call!

No but seriously, I should tell him this is a bad idea because of rogues and paladins, right?
Should I recommend just taking off the crit part of the rule? Still give extra to-hit and magic damage, but no crit?

So, this stacks with advantage as a blade type cantrip. Effectively you are making (especially at a higher level) an auto-hit when you cast this cantrip. As a player, I would be playing a Paladin 2/Sorcerer X with Great Weapon Mastery. You can smite all day long with all those spell slots and by level 5 you are making up for the GWM -5 every single time you cast the spell (2d4 = 2.5 x 2 = 5). Based on bounded accuracy you are going to be hitting. Once you hit tier 4 you are getting an average of +10 to hit on every attack with this spell.

A CR 25 Tarrasque has an AC of 25, so by tier four I'm getting a +16 on average to each hit (meaning I have a better than 50% chance to hit the Tarrasque each round). Additionally you have a 55% chance to land a crit with each strike (because 10-20 is a crit), that is making those dice rollers classes drool.


I think it is fair to say that a 55% chance of critting with every strike, even in tier 4 is beyond broken. Then add advantage in there and the numbers get even higher for a chance to crit.



I would look at a different fix for true strike personally. My opinion on True Strike is that it should give advantage on all attacks you make against that creature until the end of your next turn.

[sayaijin]

So, this stacks with advantage as a blade type cantrip. Effectively you are making (especially at a higher level) an auto-hit when you cast this cantrip. As a player, I would be playing a Paladin 2/Sorcerer X with Great Weapon Mastery. You can smite all day long with all those spell slots and by level 5 you are making up for the GWM -5 every single time you cast the spell (2d4 = 2.5 x 2 = 5). Based on bounded accuracy you are going to be hitting. Once you hit tier 4 you are getting an average of +10 to hit on every attack with this spell.

A CR 25 Tarrasque has an AC of 25, so by tier four I'm getting a +16 on average to each hit (meaning I have a better than 50% chance to hit the Tarrasque each round). Additionally you have a 55% chance to land a crit with each strike (because 10-20 is a crit), that is making those dice rollers classes drool.


I think it is fair to say that a 55% chance of critting with every strike, even in tier 4 is beyond broken. Then add advantage in there and the numbers get even higher for a chance to crit.



I would look at a different fix for true strike personally. My opinion on True Strike is that it should give advantage on all attacks you make against that creature until the end of your next turn.

Basically I created this thread to come up with an intelligent response as to how he should nerf it.

I'm leaning towards just telling him to remove the crit aspect of it. It's then a cantrip that at tier 4 guarantees one single hit. That's good for rogues, but I'm not sure if it's better than booming blade.

Alternatively, could I tell him to keep the crit and have it add +1 to attacks then +2, +3, +4 instead of d4's?

[Ettina]

I'd just fix true strike by making it a bonus action that applies to your next attack regardless of what turn it's on.

[PhantomSoul]

So, this stacks with advantage as a blade type cantrip. Effectively you are making (especially at a higher level) an auto-hit when you cast this cantrip. As a player, I would be playing a Paladin 2/Sorcerer X with Great Weapon Mastery. You can smite all day long with all those spell slots and by level 5 you are making up for the GWM -5 every single time you cast the spell (2d4 = 2.5 x 2 = 5). Based on bounded accuracy you are going to be hitting. Once you hit tier 4 you are getting an average of +10 to hit on every attack with this spell.
...
I think it is fair to say that a 55% chance of critting with every strike, even in tier 4 is beyond broken. Then add advantage in there and the numbers get even higher for a chance to crit.

...And that penalty from GWM (unless separately house-ruled) isn't affecting crit rates, meaning you could potentally crit despite having missed based on the roll total (that isn't a 20)!

Actually, your mod starts being pretty irrelevant, depending on your goals... hm...

[Kane0]

Yeah too strong. Don’t let it scale and remove the crit part, so its a cantrip that lets you make a magical weapon attack with a +1d4 to the attack roll.

[Catullus64]

I would start by asking your DM just exactly why he needs to rework True Strike in the first place. Is being able to attack slightly better with a spell really important to someone's fantasy? Is there a story really burning to be told about this cantrip? Is someone's build failing to contribute to combat, and True Strike is the only thing that can save it?

If not, why risk overpowering some build or other when you could just not use the cantrip? That's how I'd present my criticism to the DM. This isn't an entire class or even an entire subclass that's not working, it's one not-very spectacular cantrip that everyone accepts is lousy.

[DarknessEternal]

Ask him what underpowered thing he's going to fix next is.

If there's an answer, ask what's next after that.

Keep going until you make the suggestion that he just write his own RPG, or save everyone else loads of time and just play D&D.

You can't balance every spell, there's too many.

If you're going to try and balance things, you have to balance the big things, like base classes or rest.

[Ettina]

Ask him what underpowered thing he's going to fix next is.

If there's an answer, ask what's next after that.

Keep going until you make the suggestion that he just write his own RPG, or save everyone else loads of time and just play D&D.

You can't balance every spell, there's too many.

If you're going to try and balance things, you have to balance the big things, like base classes or rest.

Just because you homebrew one thing doesn't mean you're somehow obligated to homebrew everything else. That's ridiculous. And DMs being encouraged to change things as they see fit is core to D&D. I don't think I've ever actually seen a DM who sticks entirely to RAW.

[Kane0]

Ask him what underpowered thing he's going to fix next is.

If there's an answer, ask what's next after that.

Keep going until you make the suggestion that he just write his own RPG, or save everyone else loads of time and just play D&D.

You can't balance every spell, there's too many.

If you're going to try and balance things, you have to balance the big things, like base classes or rest.

I disagree.

[Amnestic]

Ask him what underpowered thing he's going to fix next is.

If there's an answer, ask what's next after that.

Keep going until you make the suggestion that he just write his own RPG, or save everyone else loads of time and just play D&D.

You can't balance every spell, there's too many.

If you're going to try and balance things, you have to balance the big things, like base classes or rest.

Gonna echo others, aggressively disagree. A lot of these little tweaks/fixes are things that you do as+when you notice them, sometimes because I've played or played with that class/subclass, sometimes hearing/reading stories about them.

The creators of the game aren't perfect, there are some subclasses that are just better than others, some spells that are 'broken' (Wish+Simulacrum weeeeee) and there's no issue with a DM wanting to change those to create a table experience that they like.

I don't think this DM has fully considered the implications of their True Strike change and it's not the change I would have made, but changing true strike so it's actually a cantrip people want to take isn't a bad thing in and of itself. Otherwise it wouldn't be such a popular topic.

[sayaijin]

Gonna echo others, aggressively disagree. A lot of these little tweaks/fixes are things that you do as+when you notice them, sometimes because I've played or played with that class/subclass, sometimes hearing/reading stories about them.

The creators of the game aren't perfect, there are some subclasses that are just better than others, some spells that are 'broken' (Wish+Simulacrum weeeeee) and there's no issue with a DM wanting to change those to create a table experience that they like.

I don't think this DM has fully considered the implications of their True Strike change and it's not the change I would have made, but changing true strike so it's actually a cantrip people want to take isn't a bad thing in and of itself. Otherwise it wouldn't be such a popular topic.

I agree. I think he was partially coming up with homebrew here for the challenge of "fixing" one of the worst spells in the game. I think part of it was because one of the new guys (Bladesinger) was planning to take it, and he didn't want to tell him not to.

My mind immediately jumped to how busted it could be on a Rogue, but I'd forgotten about paladin.

[Damon_Tor]

So my DM wanted to "fix" the cantrip True Strike, but I'm worried it is going to be too powerful.

He's made it a weapon attack cantrip like booming blade, but it works with any proficient weapon (even ranged) and it gives +1d4 to attack roll.

The part I'm worried about is where he's made it where it the d20+d4 is equal to or greater than 20, then he's treating the attack as a crit and the attack as magical. Then he's giving it the additional d4 at 5th, 11th, and 17th so 2d4, 3d4, and 4d4...seems like an auto crit at 17th level.

He's saying it's balanced because it's still only ever one attack and martials would prefer multiple attacks, but there's a guy who wants to play Rogue...

Controversial opinion: don't object. So the DM wants to make an OP cantrip. So what? Let it happen.

[Gignere]

So my DM wanted to "fix" the cantrip True Strike, but I'm worried it is going to be too powerful.

He's made it a weapon attack cantrip like booming blade, but it works with any proficient weapon (even ranged) and it gives +1d4 to attack roll.

The part I'm worried about is where he's made it where it the d20+d4 is equal to or greater than 20, then he's treating the attack as a crit and the attack as magical. Then he's giving it the additional d4 at 5th, 11th, and 17th so 2d4, 3d4, and 4d4...seems like an auto crit at 17th level.

He's saying it's balanced because it's still only ever one attack and martials would prefer multiple attacks, but there's a guy who wants to play Rogue...

Your DM just gave away the Champion’s schtick to all rogues. Imagine combining this improved true strike with Elven Accuracy and Arcane Trickster with a familiar. The AT will basically be critting almost every round.

[Mastikator]

Controversial opinion: don't object. So the DM wants to make an OP cantrip. So what? Let it happen.

Exploit it even!

[Frogreaver]

So my DM wanted to "fix" the cantrip True Strike, but I'm worried it is going to be too powerful.

He's made it a weapon attack cantrip like booming blade, but it works with any proficient weapon (even ranged) and it gives +1d4 to attack roll.

The part I'm worried about is where he's made it where it the d20+d4 is equal to or greater than 20, then he's treating the attack as a crit and the attack as magical. Then he's giving it the additional d4 at 5th, 11th, and 17th so 2d4, 3d4, and 4d4...seems like an auto crit at 17th level.

He's saying it's balanced because it's still only ever one attack and martials would prefer multiple attacks, but there's a guy who wants to play Rogue...

For a rogue I'd consider it to be in acceptable range for balance. At max level it comes out slightly stronger than booming blade for a rogue but has no secondary effects.

Your DM just gave away the Champion’s schtick to all rogues. Imagine combining this improved true strike with Elven Accuracy and Arcane Trickster with a familiar. The AT will basically be critting almost every round.

Right now the AT hits nearly every round, crits about 14% of the time and does +3d8 base damage higher with booming blade than a rogue using this version of true strike. And with booming blade there is a decent rider to potentially get more damage.

Is it slightly stronger, sure. But it's not that really that much stronger than currently available options.

[Rynjin]

Lemme put it this way: a 15 or 16-20/x2 crit rate is incredibly desirable even in 3.PF, a much higher power level system. There's a reason it's fairly difficult to GET such a crit rate in those systems, needing to use a magic item (a Keen weapon) or a Feat that requires 8th level (Improved Critical), AND only works with a set of very specific weapons (ones which already have an 18-20/x2 crit ratio).

Getting a free 15-20 crit rate on any weapon of your choice would be killer in Pathfinder. And while crits are relatively weaker in 5e (since you only get dice, not static bonuses), they don't need to be confirmed, and even an extra 1d6 is considered fairly powerful in this system, even before you factor in stuff like Sneak Attack actually being multiplied in this system. So not only is it overtuned, it's ASYMETRICALLY overtuned, being good for everyone, and bonkers for others.

TL;DR: This is a buff that would be considered arguably overpowered in a system with a much higher threshold for what constitutes "overpowered", and isn't any less so in 5e.

[Gignere]

For a rogue I'd consider it to be in acceptable range for balance. At max level it comes out slightly stronger than booming blade for a rogue but has no secondary effects.



Right now the AT hits nearly every round, crits about 14% of the time and does +3d8 base damage higher with booming blade than a rogue using this version of true strike. And with booming blade there is a decent rider to potentially get more damage.

Is it slightly stronger, sure. But it's not that really that much stronger than currently available options.

It’s not slightly stronger, when BB is adding 3d8 to damage this true strike with 4d4 added to attack roll is going to be over 90% crit rate with Elven Accuracy. This is adding around 9d6 + weapon die more damage per round, this is way more than + 3d8.

[Gignere]

The best to abuse this true strike isn’t even a rogue but rather a Paladin 2/whispers bard w/ EA stacking both Paladin smite and whispers “smite” on crits. To OP is your DM taking a new player I will show him how weak his proposed true strike is. Haha.

[Mellack]

For a rogue I'd consider it to be in acceptable range for balance. At max level it comes out slightly stronger than booming blade for a rogue but has no secondary effects.



Right now the AT hits nearly every round, crits about 14% of the time and does +3d8 base damage higher with booming blade than a rogue using this version of true strike. And with booming blade there is a decent rider to potentially get more damage.

Is it slightly stronger, sure. But it's not that really that much stronger than currently available options.

I am curious how this isn't stronger. At high level this proposed spell gives +4-+16, with an average of +10 that all counts toward critical. On average any die roll of 10+ is a critical, giving them a 55% chance. That is without advantage. With advantage, I think they will crit 80% of the time. That would seem quite strong, but I might be missing something.

Edit: I didn't mention that this also means almost any attack will hit at high levels. It moves from a 50-60% hit chance to a 95% hit chance, which is a big average damage boost just in that.

[Frogreaver]

It’s not slightly stronger, when BB is adding 3d8 to damage this true strike with 4d4 added to attack roll is going to be over 90% crit rate with Elven Accuracy. This is adding around 9d6 + weapon die more damage per round, this is way more than + 3d8.

Assuming a 100% crit rate the most damage this rogue can do with improved True Strike is 75 per round. (***Note even with this it doesn't have a 100% crit rate)

How much DPR does the EA/Booming Blade Rogue do per round? 65.6 with a chance of doing +18 if the enemy moves. Enemy needs to move a little over 1/2 the time for the DPR to be identical.

Want to reassess your conclusion based on actual numbers?

I am curious how this isn't stronger. At high level this proposed spell gives +4-+16, with an average of +10 that all counts toward critical. On average any die roll of 10+ is a critical, giving them a 55% chance. That is without advantage. With advantage, I think they will crit 80% of the time. That would seem quite strong, but I might be missing something.

Next time run the actual numbers before doing all these weird comparisons. They will usually surprise you ;)

[Gignere]

Assuming a 100% crit rate the most damage this rogue can do with improved True Strike is 75 per round. (***Note even with this it doesn't have a 100% crit rate)

How much DPR does the EA/Booming Blade Rogue do per round? 65.6 with a chance of doing +18 if the enemy moves. Enemy needs to move a little over 1/2 the time for the DPR to be identical.

Want to reassess your conclusion based on actual numbers?



Next time run the actual numbers before doing all these weird comparisons. They will usually surprise you ;)

I get 84 assuming 100% crit, and that’s only using a rapier not even Shadow blade. We’re not even accounting for the higher miss chance with only a +11 to hit compared to an average of +21 to hit with the true strike. So actual difference in DPR will be even higher as the true strike rogue will basically be always doing 84 expected damage with very low variance.

Edit: I am currently using booming blade with an AT and it’s not even close to half enemies are moving and triggering BB. I think it’s happened like once every 5 times I’ve used BB, maybe less.

[Mellack]

Assuming a 100% crit rate the most damage this rogue can do with improved True Strike is 75 per round. (***Note even with this it doesn't have a 100% crit rate)

How much DPR does the EA/Booming Blade Rogue do per round? 65.6 with a chance of doing +18 if the enemy moves. Enemy needs to move a little over 1/2 the time for the DPR to be identical.

Want to reassess your conclusion based on actual numbers?



Next time run the actual numbers before doing all these weird comparisons. They will usually surprise you ;)

I don't know how you are running the numbers, which is why I asked. What is the BB hit chance? How did you come by 14% crit? What is the DPR for this?

Can you compare that to the much higher hit chance and critical chance in this spell?

[sayaijin]

Based on what I've seen here, I'm going to make two proposals to my DM about ways to keep his idea, but balance it. The first option is to take away crit from the cantrip completely and just make it an auto-hit cantrip. You lose the damage of booming blade, but you essentially guarantee a hit. The second option keeps the to-hit bonus constant and instead scales a crit range starting at 5th level. Are these decent proposals?

True Strike
Source: Homebrew

Divination cantrip

Casting Time: 1 action
Range: Weapon Range
Components: M (a weapon you are proficient with)
Duration: 1 round

You point your weapon towards the intended target and gain insight into its defenses. Make a weapon attack with it against one creature within the weapon's range and add 1d4 to the attack roll. The damage dealt by the weapon is considered magical for overcoming resistances.

At Higher Levels. At 5th level, the attack roll is increased by an additional 1d4 (2d4). This increases at 11th level (3d4) and again at 17th level (4d4).

Spell Lists. Bard, Sorcerer, Warlock, Wizard


Keen Strike
Source: Homebrew

Divination cantrip

Casting Time: 1 action
Range: Weapon Range
Components: M (a weapon you are proficient with)
Duration: 1 round

You point your weapon towards the intended target and gain insight into its weaknesses. Make a weapon attack with it against one creature within the weapon's range and add 1d6 to the attack roll.

At Higher Levels. At 5th level, when you use this spell, you score a critical hit on the attack when you roll a 19-20. This increases at 11th level (18-20) and again at 17th level (17-20).

Spell Lists. Bard, Sorcerer, Warlock, Wizard