The dnd5.5 version of True Strike is a spell lets you make a weapon attack (Magic Action, NOT Attack Action).
The spell reads in part: "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"
Now this brings me to my question: Does this count as a spell attack? If so, a sorcerer could do this attack with advantage (with innate sorcery), and if they have a magic item that adds a bonus to spell attacks (such as Robe of the Archmagi), could add this to the attack roll.
But hold on; the spell says you are making an attack with the weapon. Does this count as a weapons attack? If so, a magic weapon (+1, +2, +3) could provide an additional to hit bonus.
This feels like double dipping, especially because then a staff of power would effectively have +4 to hit.
TLDR: Is True Strike a spell attack, weapons attack, or both?
Innate Sorcery doesn't actually use the phrase "spell attack"; it says "You have Advantage on the attack rolls of Sorcerer spells you cast." It would take some Olympic-level mental gymnastics to argue that that didn't apply to True Strike regardless of whether it's a weapon attack or a spell attack.
Similarly, if you look at the actual description of Weapon, +1, it doesn't use the phrase "weapon attack". It says "You have a +1 bonus to attack and damage rolls made with this magic weapon." And the description of True Strike says "you make one attack with the weapon". Again, the language there is pretty clear.
The question of whether the attack from True Strike counts as a spell attack is a little more ambiguous. I don't think there's a clear answer to that in the official rules right now.
True Strike is an attack with a weapon, so I'd say that is a weapon attack but there is only a very few cases where that probably matters. One case would be a Wand of the War Mage; You don't get to double dip with a +2 Rapier and a +2 Wand of the War Mage in this scenario.
True strike does NOTsay to take a Magic Action to cast but does say ...used in the spell's casting...
It DOESsay you make one attack so there is not multi-Attacks
As far as I remember, no spell says it takes the Magic Action but rather the Magic Action is taken when casting a spell with a casting time of 1 action, using an action.
As such no spell with a casting time of 1 action necessarily requires the Magic Action, which is important when remembering Sorcerer's Quicken Spell Metamagic or Eldritch Knight's (Improved) War Magic as two examples of casting spells with a casting time of 1 action but do not actually take the Magic Action to cast them.
Other melee cantrips (chill touch,,thornwhip, shocking grasp) specifically call out "make a melee SPELL ATTACK" as part of the spells description. True strike contains no such language. It only allows you to swap modifiers.
The spell should have been written more ike shillelagh, but instead they made it a magic action casting combined with the attack action to double dip on action economy. It is confusing but its definately a weapon attack. Magical weapon bonuses to hit or damage apply but any additional spell attack modifiers to hit and damage do not.
I read True Strike to mean that you enchant your weapon with the spell, then make a weapon attack. The spell's target is self, so the spell itself does not have an attack roll - you just get the extra benefit of getting to make a weapon attack right afterwards.
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.
(this is just how I see it, but please note that I'm not trying to convince anyone, I'm just sharing my opinion. The topic was broadly discussed in the Rules & Game Mechanics subforum)
To me, True Strike counts as a weapon attack for different reasons:
- The wording of the spell overrides the general rule for a Spell 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. [...]
And that text in blue is indeed the definition of a Weapon Attack: "A weapon attack is an attack roll made with a weapon."
- If True Strike were a spell attack, why specify that use your spellcasting ability modifier for the attack roll? All spell attacks behave that way by default.
- Requiring a weapon you're proficient with for the Material component is also a reason for me.
- The wording for True Strike is very similar to Booming Blade and Green-Flame Blade. If you compare the SAC previously quoted by Plaguescarred with the next two answers about BB and GFB, the relationship between the three becomes clear. I highlighted some parts about the attack type and related to the explanations above.
[...] What about unusual cases like the green-flame blade spell? The spell, which appears in the Sword Coast Adventurer’s Guide, tells you to make a melee attack with a weapon. Look at the table above, and you see that, under normal circumstances, you use your Strength modifier when you make a melee weapon attack. It doesn’t matter that a spell told you to attack. If a spell expects you to make a spell attack, the spell’s description says so. For examples, take a look at fire bolt and ray of frost. Both say it—“spell attack.”
Introduced in the Sword Coast Adventurer’s Guide , the green-flame blade and booming blade spells pose a number of questions, because they each do something unusual: require you to make a melee attack with a weapon as part of the spell’s casting.
First, each of these spells involves a normal melee weapon attack, not a spell attack, so you use whatever ability modifier you normally use with the weapon. (A spell tells you if it includes a spell attack, and neither of these spells do.) For example, if you use a longsword with green-flame blade, you use your Strength modifier for the weapon’s attack and damage rolls. [...]
The dnd5.5 version of True Strike is a spell lets you make a weapon attack (Magic Action, NOT Attack Action).
The spell reads in part: "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"
Now this brings me to my question: Does this count as a spell attack? If so, a sorcerer could do this attack with advantage (with innate sorcery), and if they have a magic item that adds a bonus to spell attacks (such as Robe of the Archmagi), could add this to the attack roll.
But hold on; the spell says you are making an attack with the weapon. Does this count as a weapons attack? If so, a magic weapon (+1, +2, +3) could provide an additional to hit bonus.
This feels like double dipping, especially because then a staff of power would effectively have +4 to hit.
TLDR: Is True Strike a spell attack, weapons attack, or both?
Innate Sorcery doesn't actually use the phrase "spell attack"; it says "You have Advantage on the attack rolls of Sorcerer spells you cast." It would take some Olympic-level mental gymnastics to argue that that didn't apply to True Strike regardless of whether it's a weapon attack or a spell attack.
Similarly, if you look at the actual description of Weapon, +1, it doesn't use the phrase "weapon attack". It says "You have a +1 bonus to attack and damage rolls made with this magic weapon." And the description of True Strike says "you make one attack with the weapon". Again, the language there is pretty clear.
The question of whether the attack from True Strike counts as a spell attack is a little more ambiguous. I don't think there's a clear answer to that in the official rules right now.
pronouns: he/she/they
True Strike is an attack with a weapon, so I'd say that is a weapon attack but there is only a very few cases where that probably matters. One case would be a Wand of the War Mage; You don't get to double dip with a +2 Rapier and a +2 Wand of the War Mage in this scenario.
True strike does NOT say to take a Magic Action to cast but does say ...used in the spell's casting...
It DOES say you make one attack so there is not multi-Attacks
Its listed casting time is 1 Action, which per the general rules on spellcasting means it’s the Magic action.
pronouns: he/she/they
As far as I remember, no spell says it takes the Magic Action but rather the Magic Action is taken when casting a spell with a casting time of 1 action, using an action.
As such no spell with a casting time of 1 action necessarily requires the Magic Action, which is important when remembering Sorcerer's Quicken Spell Metamagic or Eldritch Knight's (Improved) War Magic as two examples of casting spells with a casting time of 1 action but do not actually take the Magic Action to cast them.
Its a weapon attack.
Other melee cantrips (chill touch,,thornwhip, shocking grasp) specifically call out "make a melee SPELL ATTACK" as part of the spells description. True strike contains no such language. It only allows you to swap modifiers.
The spell should have been written more ike shillelagh, but instead they made it a magic action casting combined with the attack action to double dip on action economy. It is confusing but its definately a weapon attack. Magical weapon bonuses to hit or damage apply but any additional spell attack modifiers to hit and damage do not.
I read True Strike to mean that you enchant your weapon with the spell, then make a weapon attack. The spell's target is self, so the spell itself does not have an attack roll - you just get the extra benefit of getting to make a weapon attack right afterwards.
There's this Sage Advice Compendium question involving True Strike that may help;
(this is just how I see it, but please note that I'm not trying to convince anyone, I'm just sharing my opinion. The topic was broadly discussed in the Rules & Game Mechanics subforum)
To me, True Strike counts as a weapon attack for different reasons:
- The wording of the spell overrides the general rule for a Spell Attack:
And that text in blue is indeed the definition of a Weapon Attack: "A weapon attack is an attack roll made with a weapon."
- When a spell requires a "spell attack", it is explicitly stated (e.g. Chill Touch, Guiding Bolt, Fire Bolt, Shocking Grasp, Sorcerous Burst, or Spiritual Weapon). Sorcerous Burst originally didn't include this, but it was corrected via errata. For comparison, Swift Quiver is a good example: it doesn't include spell attacks, just weapon attacks.
- If True Strike were a spell attack, why specify that use your spellcasting ability modifier for the attack roll? All spell attacks behave that way by default.
- Requiring a weapon you're proficient with for the Material component is also a reason for me.
- The wording for True Strike is very similar to Booming Blade and Green-Flame Blade. If you compare the SAC previously quoted by Plaguescarred with the next two answers about BB and GFB, the relationship between the three becomes clear. I highlighted some parts about the attack type and related to the explanations above.