Would True Strike still suffer from Disadvantage being cast within 5 feet of a hostile?

Went from the most useless cantrip ever into a more universal sheleighleigh. A very welcome change indeed.

magic

Quote from TextLuthor >>

Would True Strike still suffer from Disadvantage being cast within 5 feet of a hostile?

Only if you are using True Strike on a Ranged Weapon.

If you're using it on a Melee Weapon, no Disadvantage.

Quote from Hearth_Truths >>

At level 5 dndbeyond is showing this doing just 1d6+5 radiant damage rather than the standard 1d6 + 1d6 for cantrip upgrade.

Its the same no matter what weapon is being wielded so presumably you also do the weapons damage.

I have the same question.

I'm assuming you add 1d6 to your damage roll and then add your spell modifier? rather than adding your spell modifier twice? For example a lvl 5 Bard with Charisma 20 using true strike with a dagger would roll for damage 1d4+1d6+5 rather than 1d4+5 and 1d6+5

Can anyone clarify?

So my human fighter is taking a small dip into Magic Initiate(Wizard). I choose Wisdom (mine is 16 so a +3 modifier at level 4) as the spell casting option, grab my spells, True Strike and two others. When I load my character sheet and select spells it shows no hit modifier (which should be a +5) nor the 1d6+3 for the damage. Just the radiant damage symbol in the button. Is this a bug or am I missing something in the set up?

Quote from Jlamprell >>

Quote from Hearth_Truths >>

At level 5 dndbeyond is showing this doing just 1d6+5 radiant damage rather than the standard 1d6 + 1d6 for cantrip upgrade.

Its the same no matter what weapon is being wielded so presumably you also do the weapons damage.

 

I have the same question.

I'm assuming you add 1d6 to your damage roll and then add your spell modifier? rather than adding your spell modifier twice? For example a lvl 5 Bard with Charisma 20 using true strike with a dagger would roll for damage 1d4+1d6+5 rather than 1d4+5 and 1d6+5

 

Can anyone clarify?

 The best way to think about NuStrike (don't call it that) is in 2 parts:

1. You make the weapon attack as normal, but you use your spellcasting modifier for hit and damage. So if it hits it does the normal damage of the weapon + your spell casting modifier. You can choose the weapon's damage OR radiant for this normal weapon damage.
2. Once you get cantrip upgrade at lvl 5 (and 11/17) you ALSO add an extra d6 (2d6/3d6) of radiant.

So in your example of a (I assume rolled stats) Lvl 5 Bard with 20 Cha casting True Strike using a dagger, they would do (on a hit):

1d4+5 (your choice of piercing or radiant) for the dagger + 1d6 radiant (from cantrip upgrade).

In DnD Beyond I've found the best way to set this up (since it doesn't work properly by default) is to go in your Attacks section and creation 2 custom actions. For each, check "display as attack" - this makes it show up as damage when you roll it). Call one of them "True Strike Dagger" (or whatever weapon) and tell it to use your spellcasting score, check "is proficient", make it radiant damage (who is actually ever picking non-elemental damage really, unless you're fighting a celestial), and set the damage die as appropriate for the weapon. Then make another action called "True Strike Bonus Damage" (or whatever) and set it to 1d6 radiant (or 2d6 etc once you reach 11/17). Do NOT set this second one as proficient and don't specify a stat. That way you have a button that does the attack. And a button that adds the damage. Yes, it would be nice if you could have it all in one custom action, but the Customize function does not allow you to specify rolling different kinds of dice - so I guess if you're using true strike with a d6 weapon you're in luck and can just add those dice to 1 action. Otherwise make 2 actions as above.

If you read this far, here's a bonus bit of tech that will make your DM hate you! Because True Strike is still causing you to make a normal weapon attack as the base part of the casting, that attack will get ALL the bonuses that your character would normally be able to apply to a regular attack. That means that if, say, you take Magic Initiate (Wizard) on your 11th level Cleric (with 20 Wis) to get True Strike, the True Strike damage STACKS with the Divine Strike 1D8 (later 2D8) damage. So when your cleric swings their warhammer with True Strike, you use Wisdom to hit and when you hit you do 2d8+5 + 2d6 Radiant damage. With a cantrip. You're welcome/I'm so sorry (depending on whether you're the player or the DM that has to deal with this nonsense).

Spell needs a backend fix so it doesn't add your spell bonus to the extra 1d6 radiant damage at higher levels. 

Divine strikes usage is tied to the action used to trigger divine strikes, which costs an action. 

As true strike also costs an action, they are both totally separate actions.

Quote from Crescent_Pig >>

Quote from sunny_d_ >>

Quote from JestersMotley >>

Question: Could you use a two-handed weapon (light-crossbow) with this? Since the crossbow is a two-handed weapon you wouldn't have a free hand, but can you use the free Interact action do perform the sematic component?

 

 You don't need 2 hands to use the crossbow until you actually fire it. I expect true strike+light crossbow will be pretty common for spellcasters in a pinch.

When a spell requires both somatic and material components the spell can be cast performing the somatic components with the same hand as the material components (in this instance, the light-crossbow). https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/dnd/phb-2024/spells#Components

 I was wondering about True Strike and light crossbow but only just saw this thread. I disagree that the two can be used together. Just because one hand can be used to fulfil both the somatic and material requirements does not mean that the two-handed requirement for crossbows disappears. You still need to aim the weapon which requires both hands. If you deny that the weapon needs to be aimed and can just be pointed in any direction, you have to accept the absurd situation where the caster could point the crossbow at himself and use True Strike to make the bolt fly towards an enemy. If True Strike could do that - Magic Missile style - I'm sure it would be in the spell's description. It's a bad faith reading of the rules to assume that the weapon's conventional use is entirely replaced by the casting of the spell.  

That said, there is at least one exception. A sorcerer can use the Subtle Spell metamagic to remove the somatic requirement, allowing the use of True Strike and light crossbow.

Taking Magic Initiate would require you to use either Intelligence or Charisma for the Attack and Damage bonuses since it is not available on a Wisdom Caster's spell list.  So it's not optimal for them unless they have decent bonuses with either of those.

Quote from DrZander1 >>

Quote from Crescent_Pig >>

Quote from sunny_d_ >>

Quote from JestersMotley >>

Question: Could you use a two-handed weapon (light-crossbow) with this? Since the crossbow is a two-handed weapon you wouldn't have a free hand, but can you use the free Interact action do perform the sematic component?

 

 You don't need 2 hands to use the crossbow until you actually fire it. I expect true strike+light crossbow will be pretty common for spellcasters in a pinch.

When a spell requires both somatic and material components the spell can be cast performing the somatic components with the same hand as the material components (in this instance, the light-crossbow). https://www.dndbeyond.com/sources/dnd/phb-2024/spells#Components

 I was wondering about True Strike and light crossbow but only just saw this thread. I disagree that the two can be used together. Just because one hand can be used to fulfil both the somatic and material requirements does not mean that the two-handed requirement for crossbows disappears. You still need to aim the weapon which requires both hands. If you deny that the weapon needs to be aimed and can just be pointed in any direction, you have to accept the absurd situation where the caster could point the crossbow at himself and use True Strike to make the bolt fly towards an enemy. If True Strike could do that - Magic Missile style - I'm sure it would be in the spell's description. It's a bad faith reading of the rules to assume that the weapon's conventional use is entirely replaced by the casting of the spell.  

That said, there is at least one exception. A sorcerer can use the Subtle Spell metamagic to remove the somatic requirement, allowing the use of True Strike and light crossbow.

I don't think anyone here is saying that True Strike is now a free Magic Missile.
Nor do I think anyone is saying that you don't need 2 hands to use a Light Crossbow.

As pointed out by Crescent_Pig, the PHB states "The spellcaster must have a hand free to access [Material component], but it can be the same hand used to perform Somatic components, if any."
RAW the Material component, in this case the Light Crossbow, can be in the same hand as the one doing the Somatic component. Both hands are also used by the Light Crossbow. The condition for spellcasting is satisfied and the condition for using a Light Crossbow is satisfied.

However, this cantrip outclassing other ranged attack cantrips doesn't feel good to me. 
True Strike Light Crossbow is only eclipsed in damage at level 5 by Poison Spray which has a pretty short range in comparison and is still ahead of Fire Bolt. At level 11 Fire Bolt ties for damage finally (and has more range).
I feel like it should've been made to work only with melee attacks by specifying "...you make one melee attack with the weapon..." but it doesn't... so as of this post RAW it works with ranged weapons.

What about on a cleric who has taken divine strike? In that case it actually keeps pace with fire bolt and still has higher average damage after 17. 3d6+5 from true strike, 2d8 from divine strike and either 1d6 from a mace or the 1d8 for a light crossbow. 

Assuming light crossbow at 17 the average damage is 29 for true trike and 22 for fire bolt. 

Value wise and arguably flavor wise even a blaster cleric can get good value in melee and at range with this cantrip and divine strikes

Quote from Vir4lPl47ypu5 >>

Taking Magic Initiate would require you to use either Intelligence or Charisma for the Attack and Damage bonuses since it is not available on a Wisdom Caster's spell list.  So it's not optimal for them unless they have decent bonuses with either of those.

The 2024 version of Magic Initiate allows you to choose which ability score to use for the spells it grants. It's no longer tied to which spell list you choose.

Here's a question: The 2014 rules had Lance as not a Heavy weapon, so my Fairy Necromancer with the 8 STR could use it and poke people from above, using the Reach property, to stay out of easy reach of enemies. Now we've converted to 2024 rules, and while I like to stay out of melee, it's gonna happen... and the 2024 version of the Lance is now a HEAVY weapon, so instead of a simple -1 to hit due to her low STR, now she's at DISADVANTAGE to hit because her STR isn't at least 13.

BUT!!! True Strike 2024 says to use the spellcasting ability instead of strength to make the attack. Does that mean that with her 19 INT score the STR score minimum to avoid disadvantage due to HEAVY property can be avoided? That's a super stretch, but I could make the argument with a straight face. "It's a magic action, the casting ability replaces the strength ability when the weapon is used in the attack, and her INT is greater than 13."

She took a dip in fighter for armor so she's proficient, so that ought to be 1d10+4 (INT bonus) +1d6 (for being level 5+) =1d10+1d6+4 damage and a +3 (Proficiency Bonus) +4 (INT bonus)=+7 to hit. Target gotta make a DC 8+3(proficienly)+4(INT bonus=DC 15 Constitution Saving Throw or be knocked PRONE.

Will this work? Obviosuly it's up to my DM but am I missing something? I'm really tryting to avoid teh whole Heavy weapon attribute that didn't exist for the first 7 levels of my character build.

yes

Quote from Goodluckfox >>

Here's a question: The 2014 rules had Lance as not a Heavy weapon, so my Fairy Necromancer with the 8 STR could use it and poke people from above, using the Reach property, to stay out of easy reach of enemies. Now we've converted to 2024 rules, and while I like to stay out of melee, it's gonna happen... and the 2024 version of the Lance is now a HEAVY weapon, so instead of a simple -1 to hit due to her low STR, now she's at DISADVANTAGE to hit because her STR isn't at least 13.

BUT!!! True Strike 2024 says to use the spellcasting ability instead of strength to make the attack. Does that mean that with her 19 INT score the STR score minimum to avoid disadvantage due to HEAVY property can be avoided? That's a super stretch, but I could make the argument with a straight face. "It's a magic action, the casting ability replaces the strength ability when the weapon is used in the attack, and her INT is greater than 13."

She took a dip in fighter for armor so she's proficient, so that ought to be 1d10+4 (INT bonus) +1d6 (for being level 5+) =1d10+1d6+4 damage and a +3 (Proficiency Bonus) +4 (INT bonus)=+7 to hit. Target gotta make a DC 8+3(proficienly)+4(INT bonus=DC 15 Constitution Saving Throw or be knocked PRONE.

Will this work? Obviosuly it's up to my DM but am I missing something? I'm really tryting to avoid teh whole Heavy weapon attribute that didn't exist for the first 7 levels of my character build.

Under Rules As Written, no, using a different ability score for the attack doesn't have any effect on the Strength requirement to use a Heavy weapon without disadvantage.

If I were DMing I would probably do something like let you have a special Fairy-designed Lance that doesn't have the Heavy property, at the cost of having a smaller damage die or something.

So I assume this doesn't work for unarmed strikes.

Can you use this with ranged weapons?

I dunno, I preferred the old True Strike's concept. It was situational, but at least it was interesting and it had some use in social situations. This is just a different cantrip with the same name. All you really needed to do to make it worthwhile was add a damage bonus to the next attack with cantrip scaling, so you're not losing out on damage for a turn, you're just moving it over to a future turn.