That's Not How True Strike Works!

[GrandMajora]

Alright, I've seen this problem crop up more times than you would expect it to, so I figured I may as well make a topic explaining the situation.

Whenever somebody makes the ruinous decision of taking TRUE STRIKE as one of their cantrips, they don't seem to understand how it actually works. I see people casting this spell on their allies, presumably under the belief that it grants them advantage on their next attack.

IT.

DOES.

NOT.

What True Strike does, is grant you (the caster) advantage to hit them (the target) on your next attack.

And if you're thinking to yourself "wow, that kind of sucks," you would be correct. That's why nobody ever actually takes True Strike as a spell option. It is by far one of the absolute worst spells in the entire franchise!

[parent child bowl]

I fell for that one when I started playing too.

I don't blame people for misunderstanding it though. The description says "Gain Advantage on your next Attack roll". It sounds like a buff.

[Dork_Stalker_310]

>that's not how true strike works
I don't think that true strike works at all.

[Detective Costeau]

I mean, True Strike "works" in the sense that it does what it says it does, people misunderstanding it aside. I suspect the misunderstanding may be from the fact that it was actually a buff you could cast on other people in 3rd edition. (didn't play 4th, not sure how it worked there)
It's just that 99% of the time, it's genuinely mathematically worse than just attacking twice.

[Sentient_Toaster]

It's actually stronger in BG3 than in tabletop, because in tabletop it only applies to one attack on your next turn.

Also, BG3 does have rather more high-powered consumables (the magical arrows, specifically) where it may actually be reasonable to sacrifce tempo and to fire one magical arrow with better odds, than to (expensively) fire two. It's still not a *great* cantrip, but it does have some value c/o that use case.

[Morion]

That cantrip would be usefull only if caster would need to target itself, to use it when enemy is out of range.

[GrandMajora]

Originally posted by Sentient_Toaster:

It's actually stronger in BG3 than in tabletop, because in tabletop it only applies to one attack on your next turn.

Also, BG3 does have rather more high-powered consumables (the magical arrows, specifically) where it may actually be reasonable to sacrifce tempo and to fire one magical arrow with better odds, than to (expensively) fire two. It's still not a *great* cantrip, but it does have some value c/o that use case.

The only people who should be taking True Strike as a spell are the Arcane Knights.

At least they have a valid reason for why they'd be getting into melee range to hit the designated target. But even then, it's still a crap option, because you can't cast and attack in the same turn, even when you get your second attack at level 5.

[TheMasterBlaster]

check Reddit for 'How to Fix True Strike'. it's been a rather popular topic in DnD nerdom for a long time.

imho, extend the duration for the next *two* attacks (any type of attack), and it's actually a balanced spell. also ditch the concentration requirement.