Guided by a flash of magical insight, you make one attack with the weapon used in the spell’s casting. The attack uses your spellcasting ability for the attack and damage rolls instead of using Strength or Dexterity. If the attack deals damage, it can be Radiant damage or the weapon’s normal damage type (your choice).
Weapon Attack:
A weapon attack is an attack roll made with a weapon.
Spell Attack:
A spell attack is an attack roll made as part of a spell or another magical effect.
True Strike is a spell that makes you make an attack (definition of a spell attack) but specifies this attack is made with a weapon (definition of weapon attack)
I can't find a rule saying a Weapon Attack can't be a Spell Attack. Is there an official ruling ? Is this an oversight in the rules ?
True Strike is a very powerful cantrip and being able to dip in both spell and weapon attack bonus could be fun.
I believe 5E24 tried replace ''weapon attacks'' with ''your attack rolls with weapons'' though (see Fighter Champion features for example) so it should make eligible any feature with this wording.
SmiteMakesRight uses the fact that Firebolt or Chill Touch specifically tell you to make a spell attack. This argument does not hold, as Sorcerous Burst only says to "Make a ranged attack roll against the target".
They also say : "A spell attack and a weapon attack are both attacks, but a weapon attack ("attack with a weapon") is not a spell attack and vice versa" which is something that does make sense but is not explicitly said in the rules, and as such, is not RAW.
I think Plaguescarred raised the most pertinent point so far: the combat section now seems to refer to attacks generically. It seems that many people are stuck using 2014 ideas when talking about attacks, which is confounded by some rules (spells) continuing to use terms like "spell attacks." But most other features use terms like what Plague mentioned. If a feature cares that you are making an attack with a spell, it will let you know.
What is the question actually about? What interaction are you concerned over?
Even though an attack might fit into one of those two glossary terms, it seems most features in the current rules do not use those terms for determining when that feature applies to a particular attack.
I copy and pasted the definitions of "Weapon Attack" and "Spell Attack" in my first post. These are the rules found in the 2024 Player's Handbook. As both definitions overlap when casting True Strike, is the attack both a weapon and a spell attack ? Is it intended, an oversight, RAW, RAI ?
(I guess it would be true for Booming Blade or Green-Flame Blade too but let's keep them on the side since those were printed before 5E24)
I don't have a specific interaction in mind, but the most common would be casting True Strike while attuned to a magic item.
Do items like the Robe of the Archmagi or the Rod of the Pact keeper give their bonus to True Strike ? Would a Staff of Power give you a +4 if you use it to make the attack ?
Guided by a flash of magical insight, you make one attack with the weapon used in the spell’s casting. The attack uses your spellcasting ability for the attack and damage rolls instead of using Strength or Dexterity. If the attack deals damage, it can be Radiant damage or the weapon’s normal damage type (your choice).
Weapon Attack:
A weapon attack is an attack roll made with a weapon.
Spell Attack:
A spell attack is an attack roll made as part of a spell or another magical effect.
True Strike is a spell that makes you make an attack (definition of a spell attack) but specifies this attack is made with a weapon (definition of weapon attack)
I can't find a rule saying a Weapon Attack can't be a Spell Attack. Is there an official ruling ? Is this an oversight in the rules ?
True Strike is a very powerful cantrip and being able to dip in both spell and weapon attack bonus could be fun.
True Strike(2024) is designed for simple/martial melee/ranged weapon attacks. The small note at the bottom of the description points this fact out.
True Strike(2014) is designed to just give advantage to attacks, the understanding that any attack that would require a roll could be considered, and could last for a minute while concentrating.
It’s a spell that has seen a major change in function and is now tied to only weapon attacks of which you only get one attack per casting.
( I’d rather use the 2014 version, the additional radiant damage isn’t as good as a full minute of advantage in actually hitting the target, which in turn slightly outperforms the additional damage, especially for the caster side of the use. )
To tell you the truth, I don't know how staff of power is different from staff of power (or similarly, how rod of the pact keeper has changed), so I cannot comment. But as to the robe of the archmagi, yes, it would seem to apply to true strike, as Plague implied.
( I’d rather use the 2014 version, the additional radiant damage isn’t as good as a full minute of advantage in actually hitting the target, which in turn slightly outperforms the additional damage, especially for the caster side of the use. )
( I’d rather use the 2014 version, the additional radiant damage isn’t as good as a full minute of advantage in actually hitting the target, which in turn slightly outperforms the additional damage, especially for the caster side of the use. )
That isn't what the 2014 true strike does. It gives advantage on the next attack you make on your next turn.
True Strike(2014) is designed to just give advantage to attacks, the understanding that any attack that would require a roll could be considered, and could last for a minute while concentrating.
It’s a spell that has seen a major change in function and is now tied to only weapon attacks of which you only get one attack per casting.
( I’d rather use the 2014 version, the additional radiant damage isn’t as good as a full minute of advantage in actually hitting the target, which in turn slightly outperforms the additional damage, especially for the caster side of the use. )
The 2014 True Strike did not give advantage to all attacks for a full minute; its concentration duration was one round, and it only gave advantage to the next attack made within that round. It was a truly useless spell.
Anyway, per the original topic, while there is no official ruling on whether the attack made in True Strike (or Green-Flame Blade or Booming Blade) is a weapon attack or spell attack, the RAI is definitely that it is a weapon attack, and you do not get to add both your Dex/Str and Spellcasting Ability bonus' to the attack; just the latter. (Though Green-Flame Blade and Booming Blade do specify in the spells' wording that what's being made is a weapon attack.)
This is basically a case of "specific beats general." Attack rolls through spells are generally spell attacks, but since True Strike (and Green-Flame Blade / Booming Blade) has you make an attack with a weapon, the specific Weapon attack rule of "A weapon attack is an attack roll made with a weapon" supersedes the general spell attack rule.
You have not read the thread. None of what you've said adresses my initial question.
The small note at the end of the spell description explains what the material component of the spell is. It does not mean the attack from True Strike does not count as a Spell Attack (as per the new definition of a spell attack)
True Strike 2014 lasts 1 round, and for a single attack roll. It is always better for a martial character to attack twice instead of once with advantage. A caster would rather use their concentration on a useful spell rather than waste it on this spell. True Strike 2014 is a very good contender for worse spell in 5e14 (but will never win, because, ya know Find Traps)
Yea, my bad. concentration for a round, 2e game in progress, got mixed waiting for another person to finish. Though, if it had been concentration for a minute it would have been better.
But as said before, the 2024 version is tied to weapon attacks only, as specifically noted by the * in the description, swaps the casters spell attack mod for the weapons strength or dexterity mod, and can change the weapons natural damage to Radiant ( if desired), and adds Radiant damage ( regardless if you swap it ) at higher caster level. ( does this take into account multi-classing, or just the class from which the spell is part of the class’s spell list?)
Sorry for that mixup, got drafted last minute for a game.
I copy and pasted the definitions of "Weapon Attack" and "Spell Attack" in my first post. These are the rules found in the 2024 Player's Handbook. As both definitions overlap when casting True Strike, is the attack both a weapon and a spell attack ? Is it intended, an oversight, RAW, RAI ?
(I guess it would be true for Booming Blade or Green-Flame Blade too but let's keep them on the side since those were printed before 5E24)
I don't have a specific interaction in mind, but the most common would be casting True Strike while attuned to a magic item.
Do items like the Robe of the Archmagi or the Rod of the Pact keeper give their bonus to True Strike ? Would a Staff of Power give you a +4 if you use it to make the attack ?
I am not asking if it should, but if it does RAW.
There is definitely room for interpretation. My interpretation is that, in general, an attack roll as part of a spell is a "spell attack", but the specific overrides the general and True Strike specifies that it uses a weapon attack instead. So, you have for that, you get your bonus from your weapon and not your +X Focus.
Yea, my bad. concentration for a round, 2e game in progress, got mixed waiting for another person to finish. Though, if it had been concentration for a minute it would have been better.
But as said before, the 2024 version is tied to weapon attacks only, as specifically noted by the * in the description, swaps the casters spell attack mod for the weapons strength or dexterity mod, and can change the weapons natural damage to Radiant ( if desired), and adds Radiant damage ( regardless if you swap it ) at higher caster level. ( does this take into account multi-classing, or just the class from which the spell is part of the class’s spell list?)
Sorry for that mixup, got drafted last minute for a game.
To address the last point, cantrips scale with character level, not class level.
While the definition of a weapon attack is an attack roll made with a weapon, it doesn't mean an attack roll made with a weapon is a weapon attack. It may just say that to have the proficiency bonus applied.
The fact the attack uses your spellcasting ability for the attack and damage rolls instead of using Strength or Dexterity ressemble a weapon attack since they normally do and it says with a weapon.
But saying that seems also doesn't ressemble a spell attack because those normally use your spellcasting ability.
If i had to guess between True Strike being both a weapon and a spell attack or none of them i'd say the latter since te spell doesn't specify it's any of them.
If i had to rule between one or the other, i'd pick weapon attack.
For True Strike I think people are trying to add in stuff that clearly isn't there. (N.B. I'm only referring to the 2024 version, since that seems to be what the original question was about)
Guided by a flash of magical insight, you make one attack with the weapon used in the spell’s casting. The attack uses your spellcasting ability for the attack and damage rolls instead of using Strength or Dexterity. If the attack deals damage, it can be Radiant damage or the weapon’s normal damage type (your choice).
The attack uses your spellcasting ability. That doesn't automatically make it a spell attack. It just means you use that ability instead of Strength or Dexterity. I would posit that if they wanted you to add any spell attack bonuses you might have then they would have specified that.
Now there is a wording problem because the definition for Spell Attack says:
Spell Attack
A spell attack is an attack roll made as part of a spell or another magical effect. See also chapter 7 (“Casting Spells”).
Which would seem to make the roll a Spell Attack roll (since the roll is being made as part of a spell), but if we look at chapter 7 to get a little more detail than one sentence we get:
Attack Rolls
Some spells require the caster to make an attack roll to determine whether the spell hits a target. Here’s how to calculate the attack modifier for your spells:
The thing is the the range for True Strike is 'Self'. There's no roll made to determine if the spell hit the target. If you want to take a hard line and say that the roll was made as part of the spell, that would mean that any bonuses to the caster's Spell Attack rolls should also add to things like the rolls made by someone caught by any spell that makes them attack their allies (since that roll is part of the spell or other magical effect).
The only area I see any real question is if the roll made with True Strike would trigger the Light property for a weapon (as a DM my interpretation is that it would, but that's my interpretation and I'm not about to argue with anyone who would interpret it differently for their game.)
I'm also confused by people talking about it being useless because of things like Concentration and the fact you can't make multiple attacks. It is an Instantaneous spell, so there are no issues with concentration. It is a Bard, Sorcerer, Warlock, and Wizard spell, and the only one of those classes who gets to make multiple attacks is Bards of the College of Valor (who can cast a Cantrip in place of one of their attacks).
Now, yes, for a multiclass character who gets multiple attacks it is not optimal (though that is mitigated somewhat by the extra damage it can do as well as allowing a different damage type) but that is a bit more situational then 'the cantrip is completely useless'.
True Strike:
Weapon Attack:
Spell Attack:
True Strike is a spell that makes you make an attack (definition of a spell attack) but specifies this attack is made with a weapon (definition of weapon attack)
I can't find a rule saying a Weapon Attack can't be a Spell Attack. Is there an official ruling ? Is this an oversight in the rules ?
True Strike is a very powerful cantrip and being able to dip in both spell and weapon attack bonus could be fun.
No official ruling on this yet since release.
I believe 5E24 tried replace ''weapon attacks'' with ''your attack rolls with weapons'' though (see Fighter Champion features for example) so it should make eligible any feature with this wording.
A very similar question was asked in this thread (the link points to the specific comment/question): Questions regarding Shillelagh, War Magic, True Strike and Extra attacks # 26
I'd say that "you make one attack with the weapon" means it's a melee or ranged weapon attack, not a melee or ranged spell attack.
In that thread, @SmiteMakesRight_3_5 also answered with a detailed explanation.
SmiteMakesRight uses the fact that Firebolt or Chill Touch specifically tell you to make a spell attack. This argument does not hold, as Sorcerous Burst only says to "Make a ranged attack roll against the target".
They also say : "A spell attack and a weapon attack are both attacks, but a weapon attack ("attack with a weapon") is not a spell attack and vice versa" which is something that does make sense but is not explicitly said in the rules, and as such, is not RAW.
Maybe Sorcerous Burst needs errata?
Other reasons to consider True Strike a weapon attack could include:
I think Plaguescarred raised the most pertinent point so far: the combat section now seems to refer to attacks generically. It seems that many people are stuck using 2014 ideas when talking about attacks, which is confounded by some rules (spells) continuing to use terms like "spell attacks." But most other features use terms like what Plague mentioned. If a feature cares that you are making an attack with a spell, it will let you know.
What is the question actually about? What interaction are you concerned over?
Even though an attack might fit into one of those two glossary terms, it seems most features in the current rules do not use those terms for determining when that feature applies to a particular attack.
I copy and pasted the definitions of "Weapon Attack" and "Spell Attack" in my first post. These are the rules found in the 2024 Player's Handbook. As both definitions overlap when casting True Strike, is the attack both a weapon and a spell attack ? Is it intended, an oversight, RAW, RAI ?
(I guess it would be true for Booming Blade or Green-Flame Blade too but let's keep them on the side since those were printed before 5E24)
I don't have a specific interaction in mind, but the most common would be casting True Strike while attuned to a magic item.
Do items like the Robe of the Archmagi or the Rod of the Pact keeper give their bonus to True Strike ? Would a Staff of Power give you a +4 if you use it to make the attack ?
I am not asking if it should, but if it does RAW.
True Strike(2024) is designed for simple/martial melee/ranged weapon attacks. The small note at the bottom of the description points this fact out.
True Strike(2014) is designed to just give advantage to attacks, the understanding that any attack that would require a roll could be considered, and could last for a minute while concentrating.
It’s a spell that has seen a major change in function and is now tied to only weapon attacks of which you only get one attack per casting.
( I’d rather use the 2014 version, the additional radiant damage isn’t as good as a full minute of advantage in actually hitting the target, which in turn slightly outperforms the additional damage, especially for the caster side of the use. )
To tell you the truth, I don't know how staff of power is different from staff of power (or similarly, how rod of the pact keeper has changed), so I cannot comment. But as to the robe of the archmagi, yes, it would seem to apply to true strike, as Plague implied.
In 2014, the duration was just one round.
That isn't what the 2014 true strike does. It gives advantage on the next attack you make on your next turn.
The 2014 True Strike did not give advantage to all attacks for a full minute; its concentration duration was one round, and it only gave advantage to the next attack made within that round. It was a truly useless spell.
Anyway, per the original topic, while there is no official ruling on whether the attack made in True Strike (or Green-Flame Blade or Booming Blade) is a weapon attack or spell attack, the RAI is definitely that it is a weapon attack, and you do not get to add both your Dex/Str and Spellcasting Ability bonus' to the attack; just the latter.
(Though Green-Flame Blade and Booming Blade do specify in the spells' wording that what's being made is a weapon attack.)
This is basically a case of "specific beats general." Attack rolls through spells are generally spell attacks, but since True Strike (and Green-Flame Blade / Booming Blade) has you make an attack with a weapon, the specific Weapon attack rule of "A weapon attack is an attack roll made with a weapon" supersedes the general spell attack rule.
You have not read the thread. None of what you've said adresses my initial question.
The small note at the end of the spell description explains what the material component of the spell is. It does not mean the attack from True Strike does not count as a Spell Attack (as per the new definition of a spell attack)
True Strike 2014 lasts 1 round, and for a single attack roll. It is always better for a martial character to attack twice instead of once with advantage. A caster would rather use their concentration on a useful spell rather than waste it on this spell. True Strike 2014 is a very good contender for worse spell in 5e14 (but will never win, because, ya know Find Traps)
Yea, my bad.
concentration for a round, 2e game in progress, got mixed waiting for another person to finish.
Though, if it had been concentration for a minute it would have been better.
But as said before, the 2024 version is tied to weapon attacks only, as specifically noted by the * in the description, swaps the casters spell attack mod for the weapons strength or dexterity mod, and can change the weapons natural damage to Radiant ( if desired), and adds Radiant damage ( regardless if you swap it ) at higher caster level. ( does this take into account multi-classing, or just the class from which the spell is part of the class’s spell list?)
Sorry for that mixup, got drafted last minute for a game.
There is definitely room for interpretation. My interpretation is that, in general, an attack roll as part of a spell is a "spell attack", but the specific overrides the general and True Strike specifies that it uses a weapon attack instead. So, you have for that, you get your bonus from your weapon and not your +X Focus.
How to add Tooltips.
It says "level" in the same way as other cantrips do so that should be the total character level.
To address the last point, cantrips scale with character level, not class level.
While the definition of a weapon attack is an attack roll made with a weapon, it doesn't mean an attack roll made with a weapon is a weapon attack. It may just say that to have the proficiency bonus applied.
The fact the attack uses your spellcasting ability for the attack and damage rolls instead of using Strength or Dexterity ressemble a weapon attack since they normally do and it says with a weapon.
But saying that seems also doesn't ressemble a spell attack because those normally use your spellcasting ability.
If i had to guess between True Strike being both a weapon and a spell attack or none of them i'd say the latter since te spell doesn't specify it's any of them.
If i had to rule between one or the other, i'd pick weapon attack.
For True Strike I think people are trying to add in stuff that clearly isn't there. (N.B. I'm only referring to the 2024 version, since that seems to be what the original question was about)
The attack uses your spellcasting ability. That doesn't automatically make it a spell attack. It just means you use that ability instead of Strength or Dexterity. I would posit that if they wanted you to add any spell attack bonuses you might have then they would have specified that.
Now there is a wording problem because the definition for Spell Attack says:
Which would seem to make the roll a Spell Attack roll (since the roll is being made as part of a spell), but if we look at chapter 7 to get a little more detail than one sentence we get:
The thing is the the range for True Strike is 'Self'. There's no roll made to determine if the spell hit the target. If you want to take a hard line and say that the roll was made as part of the spell, that would mean that any bonuses to the caster's Spell Attack rolls should also add to things like the rolls made by someone caught by any spell that makes them attack their allies (since that roll is part of the spell or other magical effect).
The only area I see any real question is if the roll made with True Strike would trigger the Light property for a weapon (as a DM my interpretation is that it would, but that's my interpretation and I'm not about to argue with anyone who would interpret it differently for their game.)
I'm also confused by people talking about it being useless because of things like Concentration and the fact you can't make multiple attacks. It is an Instantaneous spell, so there are no issues with concentration. It is a Bard, Sorcerer, Warlock, and Wizard spell, and the only one of those classes who gets to make multiple attacks is Bards of the College of Valor (who can cast a Cantrip in place of one of their attacks).
Now, yes, for a multiclass character who gets multiple attacks it is not optimal (though that is mitigated somewhat by the extra damage it can do as well as allowing a different damage type) but that is a bit more situational then 'the cantrip is completely useless'.
You're confused about target and range. The range of true strike is self, but that is not the target of the spell.