True Strike is a spell, so casting it involves using a Magic action. It's not a spell you "cast on your weapon"; it's a spell that you cast that involves making a weapon attack. (This is described in the spell's description.) So, when you cast it, you make one weapon attack as part of that Magic action. This is an attack, but it's not the Attack action. Generally, you can only take one action in a turn, so you can't take another action that turn.
Commanding your familiar to attack (which I'm assuming you're doing using the "Pact of the Chain" feature) requires that you take the Attack action, but give up one of the attacks that you can make with it; essentially your familiar is using one of your attacks. If you can only make one attack with the Attack action, then your familiar attacking is your whole action for the turn. If you have a feature (such as Extra Attack or Thirsting Blade) that lets you make more than one attack when you take the Attack action, then your familiar attacking only uses up one of those attacks, and you can still make the others as normal. These are just regular weapon attacks, not spells like True Strike.
You cannot use True Strike and command your familiar to attack on the same turn, because the former requires that you take the Magic action and the latter requires that you take the Attack action, and you only get one action per turn.
True Strike is an Instant effect. When you cast it you immediately make an attack with the weapon used as the material component. There is a requirement that the weapon have a value of at least 1 cp, but since you can use your Pact Blade as a spell focus you can use it even if it is conjured and has no value.
True Strike has fairly limited value to a Warlock, however, since they can already use their Spellcasting Ability to attack with their Pact Blade and inflict Radiant damage. The only real advantage would be if the caster was 5th level or higher, when the cantrip starts doing additional damage.
So the order would be this:
Turn 1:
Cast True Strike on yourself (just to be pedantic, you are the Target of the spell, not the weapon) and make an attack with it.
Turn 2:
Command the familiar.(n.b., this is only possible if you are using Pact of the Chain. Familiars summoned without some special feature such as this cannot attack) No weapon attack.(unless you have a feature that lets you make multiple attacks)
Turn 3:
The familiar does not continue to attack (assuming you are using Pact of the Chain). You have to lose an attack every time you want your familiar to make and attack. True Strike is no longer active (it was an instant spell and expired almost as soon as it was cast) You are now free to make any Action you wish, including Attack (which is used if you want to order your familiar to attack) or Magic for spell casting.
If I want true strike, I basically combine the swing of the weapon and the magic action together into an attack.
1-4 levels, were I get 1 swing. On turn 1 I combine my swing/true strike to hit. Turn 2 I don't swing instead then have my familiar attack, Turn 3 My familiar can keep attacking and I can swing.
Level 5 and higher. On turn 1 I combine my swing/true strike to hit, instead of a 2nd swing I have my familiar attack, Turn 2, I get 2 swings and my familiar can attack.
If I want true strike, I basically combine the swing of the weapon and the magic action together into an attack.
1-4 levels, were I get 1 swing. On turn 1 I combine my swing/true strike to hit. Turn 2 I don't swing instead then have my familiar attack, Turn 3 My familiar can keep attacking and I can swing.
Level 5 and higher. On turn 1 I combine my swing/true strike to hit, instead of a 2nd swing I have my familiar attack, Turn 2, I get 2 swings and my familiar can attack.
Not quite. You're mostly there. Two things:
Based on things you've said in other threads, the ability to make an extra attack that you're getting at level 5 is from Thirsting Blade. Thirsting Blade is something that happens when you take the Attack action. For that reason, you can't use it and True Strike (which requires taking the Magic action) in the same turn. On a turn, you can either cast True Strike as a Magic action and make one (higher damage) attack, or take the Attack action and use Thirsting Blade to make two regular attacks. As esampson said, this is one reason why most Warlocks don't take True Strike at all, especially if they have Pact of the Blade.
Your familiar can only attack when you take the Attack action and give up one of your attacks so that it can make an attack. In your example, on turn 3 your familiar does not attack unless you again give up one of your attacks for it to do so.
There are some subclasses such as Eldritch Knight and College of Valor Bard who can substitute a cantrip for one of their attacks when they take an Attack action. If you had such a feature it would be possible for you to cast True Strike and then make a second attack (without the benefits of True Strike) by making an Attack action and then substituting one of your attack rolls for casting the cantrip (which then has its own attack roll).
One turn 3 (or even turn 2) you only need to give up one of your attacks to have your familiar make an attack. You could still make your second attack with Pact of the Thirsting Blade. It should be noted that attacking uses your familiars Reaction which could, potentially, become important (e.g., something has happened that caused your familiar to already expend their Reaction, such as a spell effect, and your familiar's initiative has not yet come around again, you cannot sacrifice one of your attacks to have it make an attack).
Cast True Strike on yourself (just to be pedantic, you are the Target of the spell, not the weapon) and make an attack with it.
The truly pedantic answer is that you are the point of origin ("A spell’s range indicates how far from the spellcaster the spell’s effect can originate"), not the target. The target is whatever the attack targets.
There is a requirement that the weapon have a value of at least 1 cp, but since you can use your Pact Blade as a spell focus you can use it even if it is conjured and has no value.
Spellcasting Focus cannot be used to replace a material component with a listed cost (even a trivial one such a '1+ cp').
There is a requirement that the weapon have a value of at least 1 cp, but since you can use your Pact Blade as a spell focus you can use it even if it is conjured and has no value.
Spellcasting Focus cannot be used to replace a material component with a listed cost (even a trivial one such a '1+ cp').
Doh! Good catch. You are correct. I was thinking it was consumable components with a listed cost, but it is actually any component with a listed cost.
It is still possible to use a Pact Blade with True Strike, but it is limited to those which are weapons that the Warlock has bound themselves to, not the conjured version.
Whether or not it is strictly RAW, I think most DM's would be fine with letting you use a conjured Pact Weapon with True Strike. The 'weapon with which you have proficiency and that is worth 1+ CP' restriction is mostly there to keep you from using the spell with something like Shadow Blade or Flame Blade.
Cast True Strike on yourself (just to be pedantic, you are the Target of the spell, not the weapon) and make an attack with it.
The truly pedantic answer is that you are the point of origin ("A spell’s range indicates how far from the spellcaster the spell’s effect can originate"), not the target. The target is whatever the attack targets.
True Strike is cast on the caster and it gives you a weapon attack that has an independent target. Vampiric Touch works the same way; it gives you melee attack (in this case, spell attack) that are the effect of casting the spell on yourself. The target of Vampiric Touch is the spell caster, not everyone hit by the attacks during the duration and the target of True Strike is the spell caster, not the target of the weapon attack. The only difference between the spells is the duration.
Cast True Strike on yourself (just to be pedantic, you are the Target of the spell, not the weapon) and make an attack with it.
The truly pedantic answer is that you are the point of origin ("A spell’s range indicates how far from the spellcaster the spell’s effect can originate"), not the target. The target is whatever the attack targets.
The super-duper pedantic answer is that the word 'target' has multiple meanings within the rules, and two of them are in play when discussing True Strike. The caster is the target of the spell, while another creature is the target of the attack the spell enables
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Edoumiaond Willegume "Eddie" Podslee, Vegetanian scholar (College of Spirits bard) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator (Assassin rogue) Peter "the Pied Piper" Hausler, human con artist/remover of vermin (Circle of the Shepherd druid) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Cast True Strike on yourself (just to be pedantic, you are the Target of the spell, not the weapon) and make an attack with it.
The truly pedantic answer is that you are the point of origin ("A spell’s range indicates how far from the spellcaster the spell’s effect can originate"), not the target. The target is whatever the attack targets.
The super-duper pedantic answer is that the word 'target' has multiple meanings within the rules, and two of them are in play when discussing True Strike. The caster is the target of the spell, while another creature is the target of the attack the spell enables
Nowhere does True Strike define the caster as the target. "Self" is the Range, which defines where the effect "originates." The target is the target of the attack.
(For anyone else who might be confused why this argument happens: the Reactive Spell feature of the Warcaster feat specificies that a spell "must target only that creature" to be used as an AoO. Some people are very convinced that True Strike and other cantrips like Booming Blade are somehow ineligible for this because they have a Range of "self." This is a misreading of the range rules and the spell target rules.)
It is still possible to use a Pact Blade with True Strike, but it is limited to those which are weapons that the Warlock has bound themselves to, not the conjured version.
Tarodnet already linked to it but to include here for completion sake, a Pact of the Blade conjured weapon inherits all traits of the conjured weapon, including Cost. As such a Pact of the Blade weapon will always be valid for True Strike, unless you somehow managed to bind a weapon without an associated cost (i.e. shadow blade).
The only way to benefit from Extra Attack and the ability to cast a cantrip is from a feature that permits that, in 2024 the only two subclasses that currently permit that are College of Valor Bard (Level 6: Extra Attack, any cantrip) and Eldritch Knight (Level 7: War Magic, Wizard cantrips only). Bladesinger should also permit that but a 2024 version of Bladesinger has already hit UA, so I'd hold fire on that one.
An alternative way to be able to benefit from extra attack and casting True Strike would be the Quicken Spell Metamagic from Sorcerer, where you perform your attacks as normal and then use Quicken Spell to cast True Strike for an additional attack, however this is very resource intensive but it's a method other than Light Property, PAM (Pole Strike) or GWM (Hew) to be able to attack with a bonus action.
Cast True Strike on yourself (just to be pedantic, you are the Target of the spell, not the weapon) and make an attack with it.
The truly pedantic answer is that you are the point of origin ("A spell’s range indicates how far from the spellcaster the spell’s effect can originate"), not the target. The target is whatever the attack targets.
Cast True Strike on yourself (just to be pedantic, you are the Target of the spell, not the weapon) and make an attack with it.
The truly pedantic answer is that you are the point of origin ("A spell’s range indicates how far from the spellcaster the spell’s effect can originate"), not the target. The target is whatever the attack targets.
The super-duper pedantic answer is that the word 'target' has multiple meanings within the rules, and two of them are in play when discussing True Strike. The caster is the target of the spell, while another creature is the target of the attack the spell enables
Nowhere does True Strike define the caster as the target. "Self" is the Range, which defines where the effect "originates." The target is the target of the attack.
(For anyone else who might be confused why this argument happens: the Reactive Spell feature of the Warcaster feat specificies that a spell "must target only that creature" to be used as an AoO. Some people are very convinced that True Strike and other cantrips like Booming Blade are somehow ineligible for this because they have a Range of "self." This is a misreading of the range rules and the spell target rules.)
That is debatable. I did not say you are the Target because of the Range of Self. The description of the spell itself states 'Guided by a flash of magical insight, you make one attack with the weapon used in the spell’s casting'. That very much sounds to me like the caster is also the target and the result of the spell is that they then make an attack.
There are other examples of spells which target something and then allow that something to attack (e.g., Animate Dead, Animate Object, Haste).
I will, however, concede that it is a debatable point and not a point set in black and white RAW and some people may interpret it differently.
Yes, which ever way you interpret it can have effects on certain things such as Warcaster. This is no different from the issue that you cannot cast True Strike as one of your multiple attacks (without a class feature) because it is not an Attack action.
Cast True Strike on yourself (just to be pedantic, you are the Target of the spell, not the weapon) and make an attack with it.
The truly pedantic answer is that you are the point of origin ("A spell’s range indicates how far from the spellcaster the spell’s effect can originate"), not the target. The target is whatever the attack targets.
The super-duper pedantic answer is that the word 'target' has multiple meanings within the rules, and two of them are in play when discussing True Strike. The caster is the target of the spell, while another creature is the target of the attack the spell enables
Nowhere does True Strike define the caster as the target. "Self" is the Range, which defines where the effect "originates." The target is the target of the attack.
(For anyone else who might be confused why this argument happens: the Reactive Spell feature of the Warcaster feat specificies that a spell "must target only that creature" to be used as an AoO. Some people are very convinced that True Strike and other cantrips like Booming Blade are somehow ineligible for this because they have a Range of "self." This is a misreading of the range rules and the spell target rules.)
I agree with you.
Range and Targets are different concepts, and each of them have its own paragraph in Spells chapter.
Range "indicates how far from the spellcaster the spell’s effect can originate", but it does not define the targets. Sometimes, a spell with "Range: Self" can target you, but only if the spell says so in its description (e.g. False Life or Shield)
But in reality, you can't tell what the spell targets without reading the Effect of a spell, because not all "Range: Self" spells target you. Good examples of this are Scrying and Eyebite.
And it's the same for Touch or Distance spells: just knowing the Range, you don't know the target of the spell.
I hadn't consider War Caster's Reactive Strike but, upon consideration, I'd argue that True Strike is not eligible.
A 'target' is something affected by the spell. We know with certainty that True Strike has at least one target: the character/weapon. True Strike modifies the weapon's stat, damage type and provides additional damage dice to the weapon. Your weapon is most certainly "selected to receive the effects of a spell or another phenomenon." when you cast True Strike. However, this target is not eligible for War Caster.
So the debate over whether True Strike has an additional target or not doesn't come into play. Even if you argue that True Strike also targets the enemy, it still wouldn't be a spell that only targets the enemy.
The SAC has this answer. To me, that "special feature" could be War Caster.
Can you use True Strike with Extra Attack, Opportunity Attack, Sneak Attack, and other weapon attack options?
True Strike doesn’t work with Extra Attack or any other feature that requires the Attack action. Like other spells with a casting time of an action, casting True Strike requires you to take the Magic action, not the Attack action. Similarly, unless a special feature allows you to do so, you can’t cast True Strike when making an Opportunity Attack.
However, an attack made as part of True Strike works with Sneak Attack so long as it fills the normal requirements for that feature. For example, if you have the Sneak Attack feature and cast True Strike with a Finesse weapon, you can deal Sneak Attack damage to the target of the attack if you have Advantage on the attack roll and hit.
Nowhere does True Strike define the caster as the target. "Self" is the Range, which defines where the effect "originates." The target is the target of the attack.
Targets
A typical spell requires the caster to pick one or more targets to be affected by the spell’s magic. A spell’s description says whether the spell targets creatures, objects, or something else.
Both the caster and the creature being attacked are "affected" by the spell's magic
(For anyone else who might be confused why this argument happens: the Reactive Spell feature of the Warcaster feat specificies that a spell "must target only that creature" to be used as an AoO. Some people are very convinced that True Strike and other cantrips like Booming Blade are somehow ineligible for this because they have a Range of "self." This is a misreading of the range rules and the spell target rules.)
It's a silly argument, because Warcaster is clearly using only one specific definition of 'target' -- the one that refers to the target of an attack
Edoumiaond Willegume "Eddie" Podslee, Vegetanian scholar (College of Spirits bard) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator (Assassin rogue) Peter "the Pied Piper" Hausler, human con artist/remover of vermin (Circle of the Shepherd druid) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I have a familiar I need to tell to attack. (1 attack action)
I have "Pact" Weapon (no weapon mastery so no nick ability) I can attack with (1 attack action)
I have/can cast true strike. (1 attack action)
The intent is do it all (above actions) I realize I can't. So how does this actually work?
Turn one:
Cast true strike on my weapon, that is one action so nothing else is done?
or use magic action cast true strike and still use an attack action so my weapon if it hits, can use the true strike damage?
Turn 2:
Command the familiar and
therefore no weapon attacks?
Turn 3:
The familiar continues to attack, true strike is still active so I can still wield my weapon and attempt to hit. But can I also cast a spell?
or no spell due to using an attack action and magic action is unavailable?
True Strike is a spell, so casting it involves using a Magic action. It's not a spell you "cast on your weapon"; it's a spell that you cast that involves making a weapon attack. (This is described in the spell's description.) So, when you cast it, you make one weapon attack as part of that Magic action. This is an attack, but it's not the Attack action. Generally, you can only take one action in a turn, so you can't take another action that turn.
Commanding your familiar to attack (which I'm assuming you're doing using the "Pact of the Chain" feature) requires that you take the Attack action, but give up one of the attacks that you can make with it; essentially your familiar is using one of your attacks. If you can only make one attack with the Attack action, then your familiar attacking is your whole action for the turn. If you have a feature (such as Extra Attack or Thirsting Blade) that lets you make more than one attack when you take the Attack action, then your familiar attacking only uses up one of those attacks, and you can still make the others as normal. These are just regular weapon attacks, not spells like True Strike.
You cannot use True Strike and command your familiar to attack on the same turn, because the former requires that you take the Magic action and the latter requires that you take the Attack action, and you only get one action per turn.
pronouns: he/she/they
True Strike is an Instant effect. When you cast it you immediately make an attack with the weapon used as the material component. There is a requirement that the weapon have a value of at least 1 cp, but since you can use your Pact Blade as a spell focus you can use it even if it is conjured and has no value.
True Strike has fairly limited value to a Warlock, however, since they can already use their Spellcasting Ability to attack with their Pact Blade and inflict Radiant damage. The only real advantage would be if the caster was 5th level or higher, when the cantrip starts doing additional damage.
So the order would be this:
Turn 1:
Cast True Strike on yourself (just to be pedantic, you are the Target of the spell, not the weapon) and make an attack with it.
Turn 2:
Command the familiar.(n.b., this is only possible if you are using Pact of the Chain. Familiars summoned without some special feature such as this cannot attack)
No weapon attack.(unless you have a feature that lets you make multiple attacks)
Turn 3:
The familiar does not continue to attack (assuming you are using Pact of the Chain). You have to lose an attack every time you want your familiar to make and attack.
True Strike is no longer active (it was an instant spell and expired almost as soon as it was cast)
You are now free to make any Action you wish, including Attack (which is used if you want to order your familiar to attack) or Magic for spell casting.
Thank you .
To confirm,
If I want true strike, I basically combine the swing of the weapon and the magic action together into an attack.
1-4 levels, were I get 1 swing. On turn 1 I combine my swing/true strike to hit. Turn 2 I don't swing instead then have my familiar attack, Turn 3 My familiar can keep attacking and I can swing.
Level 5 and higher. On turn 1 I combine my swing/true strike to hit, instead of a 2nd swing I have my familiar attack, Turn 2, I get 2 swings and my familiar can attack.
Not quite. You're mostly there. Two things:
pronouns: he/she/they
Just for the sake of completeness:
There are some subclasses such as Eldritch Knight and College of Valor Bard who can substitute a cantrip for one of their attacks when they take an Attack action. If you had such a feature it would be possible for you to cast True Strike and then make a second attack (without the benefits of True Strike) by making an Attack action and then substituting one of your attack rolls for casting the cantrip (which then has its own attack roll).
One turn 3 (or even turn 2) you only need to give up one of your attacks to have your familiar make an attack. You could still make your second attack with Pact of the Thirsting Blade. It should be noted that attacking uses your familiars Reaction which could, potentially, become important (e.g., something has happened that caused your familiar to already expend their Reaction, such as a spell effect, and your familiar's initiative has not yet come around again, you cannot sacrifice one of your attacks to have it make an attack).
The truly pedantic answer is that you are the point of origin ("A spell’s range indicates how far from the spellcaster the spell’s effect can originate"), not the target. The target is whatever the attack targets.
Spellcasting Focus cannot be used to replace a material component with a listed cost (even a trivial one such a '1+ cp').
Doh! Good catch. You are correct. I was thinking it was consumable components with a listed cost, but it is actually any component with a listed cost.
It is still possible to use a Pact Blade with True Strike, but it is limited to those which are weapons that the Warlock has bound themselves to, not the conjured version.
Regarding whether a summoned pact weapon meets the 1 CP requirement for True Strike, there was a discussion about it here: https://www.dndbeyond.com/forums/dungeons-dragons-discussion/rules-game-mechanics/228852-2024-feat-and-spell-changes?comment=13
Whether or not it is strictly RAW, I think most DM's would be fine with letting you use a conjured Pact Weapon with True Strike. The 'weapon with which you have proficiency and that is worth 1+ CP' restriction is mostly there to keep you from using the spell with something like Shadow Blade or Flame Blade.
True Strike is cast on the caster and it gives you a weapon attack that has an independent target. Vampiric Touch works the same way; it gives you melee attack (in this case, spell attack) that are the effect of casting the spell on yourself. The target of Vampiric Touch is the spell caster, not everyone hit by the attacks during the duration and the target of True Strike is the spell caster, not the target of the weapon attack. The only difference between the spells is the duration.
How to add Tooltips.
My houserulings.
The super-duper pedantic answer is that the word 'target' has multiple meanings within the rules, and two of them are in play when discussing True Strike. The caster is the target of the spell, while another creature is the target of the attack the spell enables
Active characters:
Edoumiaond Willegume "Eddie" Podslee, Vegetanian scholar (College of Spirits bard)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator (Assassin rogue)
Peter "the Pied Piper" Hausler, human con artist/remover of vermin (Circle of the Shepherd druid)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Nowhere does True Strike define the caster as the target. "Self" is the Range, which defines where the effect "originates." The target is the target of the attack.
(For anyone else who might be confused why this argument happens: the Reactive Spell feature of the Warcaster feat specificies that a spell "must target only that creature" to be used as an AoO. Some people are very convinced that True Strike and other cantrips like Booming Blade are somehow ineligible for this because they have a Range of "self." This is a misreading of the range rules and the spell target rules.)
Tarodnet already linked to it but to include here for completion sake, a Pact of the Blade conjured weapon inherits all traits of the conjured weapon, including Cost. As such a Pact of the Blade weapon will always be valid for True Strike, unless you somehow managed to bind a weapon without an associated cost (i.e. shadow blade).
The only way to benefit from Extra Attack and the ability to cast a cantrip is from a feature that permits that, in 2024 the only two subclasses that currently permit that are College of Valor Bard (Level 6: Extra Attack, any cantrip) and Eldritch Knight (Level 7: War Magic, Wizard cantrips only). Bladesinger should also permit that but a 2024 version of Bladesinger has already hit UA, so I'd hold fire on that one.
An alternative way to be able to benefit from extra attack and casting True Strike would be the Quicken Spell Metamagic from Sorcerer, where you perform your attacks as normal and then use Quicken Spell to cast True Strike for an additional attack, however this is very resource intensive but it's a method other than Light Property, PAM (Pole Strike) or GWM (Hew) to be able to attack with a bonus action.
That is debatable. I did not say you are the Target because of the Range of Self. The description of the spell itself states 'Guided by a flash of magical insight, you make one attack with the weapon used in the spell’s casting'. That very much sounds to me like the caster is also the target and the result of the spell is that they then make an attack.
There are other examples of spells which target something and then allow that something to attack (e.g., Animate Dead, Animate Object, Haste).
I will, however, concede that it is a debatable point and not a point set in black and white RAW and some people may interpret it differently.
Yes, which ever way you interpret it can have effects on certain things such as Warcaster. This is no different from the issue that you cannot cast True Strike as one of your multiple attacks (without a class feature) because it is not an Attack action.
I agree with you.
Range and Targets are different concepts, and each of them have its own paragraph in Spells chapter.
Range "indicates how far from the spellcaster the spell’s effect can originate", but it does not define the targets. Sometimes, a spell with "Range: Self" can target you, but only if the spell says so in its description (e.g. False Life or Shield)
But in reality, you can't tell what the spell targets without reading the Effect of a spell, because not all "Range: Self" spells target you. Good examples of this are Scrying and Eyebite.
And it's the same for Touch or Distance spells: just knowing the Range, you don't know the target of the spell.
I hadn't consider War Caster's Reactive Strike but, upon consideration, I'd argue that True Strike is not eligible.
A 'target' is something affected by the spell. We know with certainty that True Strike has at least one target: the character/weapon. True Strike modifies the weapon's stat, damage type and provides additional damage dice to the weapon. Your weapon is most certainly "selected to receive the effects of a spell or another phenomenon." when you cast True Strike. However, this target is not eligible for War Caster.
So the debate over whether True Strike has an additional target or not doesn't come into play. Even if you argue that True Strike also targets the enemy, it still wouldn't be a spell that only targets the enemy.
The SAC has this answer. To me, that "special feature" could be War Caster.
Both the caster and the creature being attacked are "affected" by the spell's magic
It's a silly argument, because Warcaster is clearly using only one specific definition of 'target' -- the one that refers to the target of an attack
Active characters:
Edoumiaond Willegume "Eddie" Podslee, Vegetanian scholar (College of Spirits bard)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator (Assassin rogue)
Peter "the Pied Piper" Hausler, human con artist/remover of vermin (Circle of the Shepherd druid)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)