Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345
Results 121 to 134 of 134
  1. - Top - End - #121
    Orc in the Playground
     
    NecromancerGuy

    Join Date
    Nov 2018

    Default Re: Fixing True Strike?

    Quote Originally Posted by Man_Over_Game View Post
    Range increased to 120 feet.

    Your next attack before the end of your next turn against the target has Advantage to hit. If the attack misses, it instead hits and deals half damage.

    --------------

    Would you use it?
    With concentration removed true strike seems like a spell with some solid niche use on blasters and rouges
    Last edited by Nhorianscum; 2019-05-11 at 08:22 AM.

  2. - Top - End - #122
    Librarian in the Playground Moderator
     
    Mark Hall's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    San Antonio, Texas
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Fixing True Strike?

    Quote Originally Posted by Zhorn View Post
    I still strongly disagree with any direct damage increasing cooked baseline into the cantrip, especially since the whole shtick of what True Strike is about is accuracy, and if you go for accuracy + power then you'll end up at the some point of being superior to the attack action under more circumstances than intended.

    A compromise between accuracy only and a level scaling cantrip might be to take the for of 1d4 to hit like a few others have mentions, bake that into a weapon attack cantrip such as what we've been doing, and have that bonus accuracy dice scale up under the same level breakpoints as the other cantrips



    This reintroduces both a chance to miss into the attack with the chance to crit.
    Levels 1 to 4: +1 to +4 bonus to hit.
    Levels 5 to 10: +2 to +8 bonus to hit.
    Levels 11 to 16: +3 to +12 bonus to hit.
    Levels 17 to 20: +4 to +16 bonus to hit.

    Not as strong as an auto hit, but scales up to be almost as good as one at higher levels.
    I'd say at low levels (1-4) is would be comparable to the power level of GFB on a standard array character.
    I like this approach, as well. It strikes a good middle ground between the auto-hit, and preserves the ability to have criticals, but also to have misses.
    The Cranky Gamer
    *It isn't realism, it's verisimilitude; the appearance of truth within the framework of the game.
    *Picard management tip: Debate honestly. The goal is to arrive at the truth, not at your preconception.
    *Savage Scrolls: A Savage Worlds/Elder Scrolls Conversion
    *The One Deck Engine: Gaming on a budget
    Avatar is from local user Mehangel
    Written by Me on DriveThru RPG
    If you need me to address a thread as a moderator, include a link.

  3. - Top - End - #123
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    BardGuy

    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    Iceland
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Fixing True Strike?

    Quote Originally Posted by Mark Hall View Post
    I like this approach, as well. It strikes a good middle ground between the auto-hit, and preserves the ability to have criticals, but also to have misses.
    I like it, it preserves the delicate balance of lower levels, yet includes enough scaling to still be relative post-5.
    Bonus action, applying to attack rolls and saving throws, or Greenflame-type cantrip?

  4. - Top - End - #124
    Librarian in the Playground Moderator
     
    Mark Hall's Avatar

    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    San Antonio, Texas
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Fixing True Strike?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bjarkmundur View Post
    I like it, it preserves the delicate balance of lower levels, yet includes enough scaling to still be relative post-5.
    Bonus action, applying to attack rolls and saving throws, or Greenflame-type cantrip?
    Zhorn left it as Greenflame-style.
    The Cranky Gamer
    *It isn't realism, it's verisimilitude; the appearance of truth within the framework of the game.
    *Picard management tip: Debate honestly. The goal is to arrive at the truth, not at your preconception.
    *Savage Scrolls: A Savage Worlds/Elder Scrolls Conversion
    *The One Deck Engine: Gaming on a budget
    Avatar is from local user Mehangel
    Written by Me on DriveThru RPG
    If you need me to address a thread as a moderator, include a link.

  5. - Top - End - #125
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Kobold

    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Fixing True Strike?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bjarkmundur View Post
    I like it, it preserves the delicate balance of lower levels, yet includes enough scaling to still be relative post-5.
    Bonus action, applying to attack rolls and saving throws, or Greenflame-type cantrip?
    No to bonus action, it's an action cantrip with the attack baked in like GFB or BB.
    No to saving throws or stacking onto other types of attacks rolls, that's Bless.

    There's a point in design where you have to look at all the things you want to do and stop yourself from getting greedy

  6. - Top - End - #126
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    BardGuy

    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    Iceland
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Fixing True Strike?

    I already wrote it on, before you answered xD
    Looks pretty cool on my character sheet:

    Weapon Cantrip
    Action, 5 feet
    Attack: +5 vs. AC
    Damage: 1d8+5 Slashing Damage
    Greenflame: On hit, deal 2 fire damage to a different creature I can see within 5 feet of my target or:
    True Strike: +1d4 to hit.

    Edit: At level 5, I get better DPR from using Greenflame Blade (against 2 targets) or Extra attack (against 1 target), even against high AC opponents. I even get 0,1 better DPR from using Greenflame blade against one target (because of the extra 1d8) than I get from getting +2d4 on the attack roll. I actually get less DPR even if the hit chance is 100%, which seems silly. Am i doing something terribly wrong here? This basically means that even though it's more accurate, I'm better off crossing my fingers with extra attack or greenflame blade :/
    Maybe this changes at level 7 with War Magic?

    Maybe True Strike is just more intended for silly gishes, paladins and rouges, and not EKs :/

    Suggested fix: Add some sort of utility or niche, since straight-up numbers end up either being too strong or too weak.
    If we boost the numbers to deal OK damage, it becomes an auto-pick...

  7. - Top - End - #127
    Colossus in the Playground
     
    JNAProductions's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Location
    Fighting Demons!

    Default Re: Fixing True Strike?

    +1d4 to-hit does NOT need to scale.

    Guidance doesnít.
    Bless doesnít.
    But theyíre both top-notch spells.
    I have a LOT of Homebrew!

    Current Avatar by Elder Tsofu, who is awesome!

    Spoiler: Former Avatars
    Show
    Spoiler: Avatar (Not In Use) By Professor Gnoll!
    Show


    Spoiler: Avatar (Not In Use) By Cdr. Fallout!
    Show

  8. - Top - End - #128
    Bugbear in the Playground
     
    BardGuy

    Join Date
    Feb 2019
    Location
    Iceland
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Fixing True Strike?

    This is true, as displayed via my comment "even at 100% hit chance, EA and GFB are better". It doesn't matter how much precision you give an attack. If the damage is still inadequate, the DPR comes out lacking. This is the predicament with True Strike. It might get your accuracy up to the 90s, but the payoff isn't there.

    If True Strike is intended to be presented as an option (to an EK, in this case) it would necessitate at least 1d4 bonus damage at level 1 and 2d4 bonus damage at levels 5.
    But doing so makes it too strong for other classes, better suited to utilize it, such as ATs and Paladins.

    This begs the question; where does True Strike shine?

    Edit: The more I play around with the DPR calculator, the more confused I get.
    Edit 2: How exactly is GFB getting away with +2d8 bonus damage at level 5? :O

  9. - Top - End - #129
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Kobold

    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Fixing True Strike?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bjarkmundur View Post
    This is true, as displayed via my comment "even at 100% hit chance, EA and GFB are better". It doesn't matter how much precision you give an attack. If the damage is still inadequate, the DPR comes out lacking. This is the predicament with True Strike. It might get your accuracy up to the 90s, but the payoff isn't there.

    If True Strike is intended to be presented as an option (to an EK, in this case) it would necessitate at least 1d4 bonus damage at level 1 and 2d4 bonus damage at levels 5.
    But doing so makes it too strong for other classes, better suited to utilize it, such as ATs and Paladins.

    This begs the question; where does True Strike shine?

    Edit: The more I play around with the DPR calculator, the more confused I get.
    Edit 2: How exactly is GFB getting away with +2d8 bonus damage at level 5? :O
    When looking at ability balance, it's not all just about raw damage (or DPR if you rather think in those terms), there is also a degree of applicability (in how versatile the ability is and in how many different situations it can be used) along with its synergentic property (how well it works with and off other abilities).
    This is why when crunching numbers, you'll end up with vastly different outcomes between abilities, because after enough factors come into play it's comparing apples to oranges.

    Talking strictly in terms of Eldritch Knight using a 1d8 weapon;
    If looking at a single melee attack (levels 1-4, using 1 Action), Green-Flame Blade will come out ahead as the superior pick in terms of damage.
    Switch to comparing GFB against Extra Attack (levels 5-6), the numbers depend on your ability score modifiers as to what takes the lead. Have good INT + STR/DEX? GFB it is. Only have a good STR/DEX but not INT? Extra Attack is stronger.
    Get War Magic and levels 7-10 become Cantrip priority in using GFB and using the Bonus action attack to pull ahead. Already using your bonus action for something else? Then the Attack Action is still stronger.

    ^ This is all old hat for anyone who's played an EK, but it's to demonstrate the point of the priorities flipping about as more stuff comes into play.
    Eg: using a bow at range instead of attacking? GFB doesn't even apply to the scenario any more, as GFB is strictly melee.

    Now throwing the 1d4 version of modified True Strike into the mix;
    Spoiler: To save jumping back to earlier pages
    Show
    True Strike (modified)
    Divination cantrip
    Casting Time: 1 action
    Range: -
    Components: V, S, M (a weapon)
    Duration: Instantaneous

    As part of the action used to cast this spell, you must make a weapon attack with your currently equipped weapon against one creature within the that weapon's range/reach, otherwise the spell fails. As a benefit of this spell, you add 1d4 to the roll to hit.
    This spell's bonus to hit increases by 1d4 when you reach 5th level (2d4), 11th level (3d4), and 17th level (4d4).

    And in areas where GFB wouldn't apply, this version of TS would come out ahead for levels 1-4 and 7-10 (assuming no need of bonus actions in the later). The trade off is power vs reliability, with the focus being less of maximised potential damage, and instead getting reliable damage when you need it. The power aspect of the modified TS is with its diverse synergy in gish builds rather than being specialised into strictly melee only.
    Only have a single attack and really need it to land? TS.
    Have a high AC opponent? TS will probably get you further than GFB.
    And now being back on the d20 as opposed to that auto-hit version I have on an earlier page;
    Spoiler: another reference for convenience
    Show
    True Strike (modified)
    Divination cantrip
    Casting Time: 1 action
    Range: -
    Components: V, S, M (a weapon capable of dealing damage)
    Duration: Instantaneous

    As part of the action used to cast this spell, you make one successful regular attack with your currently equipped weapon against one creature within the that weapon's range/reach, otherwise the spell fails. When hit, the target suffers weapon damage and effects as if hit by a regular attack.

    it would qualify for the -5 to hit penalty of GWM/SS to get that +10 to damage.
    Or looking at net such as JNAProductions was bringing attention to. Nets deal no damage but are considerably powerful when you have them land. This d4 version of TS will synergies with nets without making it an overpowered option as it would be under an auto-hit system.

    You are right in that this version of TS does not compete well with GFB, and it shouldn't. It's playing a different game in addressing a different set of scenarios being stronger in different areas. And that's a good thing. If you look to make an ability on the same tier as something else AND be better than it, then you're just removing the reason for that other ability to exist in the first place.

    Speaking of;
    Quote Originally Posted by Bjarkmundur View Post
    Weapon Cantrip
    Action, 5 feet
    Attack: +5 vs. AC
    Damage: 1d8+5 Slashing Damage
    Greenflame: On hit, deal 2 fire damage to a different creature I can see within 5 feet of my target.
    True Strike: +1d4 to hit.
    When I said "it's an action cantrip with the attack baked in like GFB or BB", I meant it behaved like BB or GFB in having an attack as part of the spell, not casting BB or GFB as part of TS. That's two cantrips in one you have written there.

    Moving on
    Quote Originally Posted by JNAProductions View Post
    +1d4 to-hit does NOT need to scale.

    Guidance doesnít.
    Bless doesnít.
    But theyíre both top-notch spells.
    Which I can understand where you're coming from, but there's also a few differences in application between these abilities to consider.
    This True Strike is strictly a weapon attack roll
    Guidance is for ability checks, and is mostly for out of combat scenarios (in combat the caster gets farm more value out of performing their own action).
    Bless applies to all saving throws giving it a strong defensive utility, and is not limited to a single attack in an action, so it scales with Extra Attack (and all weapon and spell attack rolls in general) giving it a very strong offensive presence on the field. It also does scale by spell level, but by number of targets that it is cast on.
    This is that variability/synergy vs speciality concept I was touching on earlier.
    Bless a level 20 fighter before they go on an action surge attack nova round, that 1d4 to EVERY attack they make is going to go a long way, a far bigger impact than a single attack cantrip adding 4d4 to the 'to hit' roll.
    Like before: apples to oranges

    Still I do prefer the auto-hit version I've been working at. But I do recognise that it's hard to work around the clear power advantage it presents before Extra attack at level 5 corrects the imbalance (which I maintain isn't game breaking, just less than ideal).

  10. - Top - End - #130
    Titan in the Playground
     
    Segev's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location

    Default Re: Fixing True Strike?

    True strikeís problem in both 3e and 5e is that it is a lost round to prepare an attack that is presumed to be likely to hit. In 3e, the flat-out +20 to hit plus negating all penalties for concealment meant it was situationally useful for tough but important shots. It also was 1st level, and still considered weak for first level.

    As a cantrip in 5e, especially with bounded accuracy, adding +20 is excessive, even with the fact that it takes an extra round of casting to prep it. Giving Advantage, however, is weak because rolling twice and taking the better roll is almost always worse than rolling twice and taking both rolls. Plus, it is negated by Disadvantage, and there are numerous other ways to gain Advantage that donít take a cantrip and an action and concentration to set up. Itís not even useful to the Arcane Trickster for setting up Sneak Attack, since he can Hide as a bonus action to gain Advantage on an attack in the same round.

    As a cantrip, it canít push the result higher than 20 on the die, or at least not much. +1d4 seems okay, but the action to cast is far costlier in combat than Guidanceís usual non-combat uses are. Guidance can also be cast on others. And letís not get started on Resistance, which really isnít useful due to its short duration and the unpredictable nature of when it will be needed.

    Guaranteeing Advantage regardless of Disadvantage-causing circumstances seems right to me for spending an action and using Concentration. If you donít like that, then a more fitting effect would be guaranteeing a hit, and only rolling to check for criticals. No granting of Advantage at all; if you need Advantage to proc another effect, get it from somewhere else. Disadvantage is effectively negated by the canít-miss nature of the attack, save for making crits even less likely.

    But in any event, it needs to be better than just attacking twice, and it needs to be better than having your familiar use the Help action to give you Advantage.

    Guaranteed Advantage or a guaranteed hit would do this.

  11. - Top - End - #131
    Halfling in the Playground
     
    RedKnightGirl

    Join Date
    Jan 2018

    Default Re: Fixing True Strike?

    My own idea of a revised version:

    True Strike

    Casting Time: 1 action
    Range: Self
    Duration: 1 minute; Concentration

    While the spell is in effect, True Strike ensures that you cannot miss. If you make an attack roll that misses, the attack's normal effect is still applied. After you miss an attack, the spell ends.

    At 5th level, the effect lasts through 2 missed attacks. At 11th level, the effect lasts through 3 missed attacks. At 17th level, the effect lasts through 4 missed attacks.

    ---

    There's still value in getting advantage normally (both for crit chances, and things like Sneak Attack). It helps provide a safety net against disadvantage. It scales up in value with your level.

    I considered the impact on abilities like GWM, and reworded the spell effect slightly. Rather than turning a miss into a "hit", it just says that the attack's normal effect still applies even when you miss. In the case of GWM, since you did not roll an actual hit on the attack, the bonus damage does not apply.

    Since it still takes a regular action to cast, it's not really beneficial to recast in combat, but it should still be useful even if you cast it once in the first round of combat rather than casting before combat starts.

  12. - Top - End - #132
    Barbarian in the Playground
     
    Kobold

    Join Date
    Dec 2018
    Gender
    Male

    Default Re: Fixing True Strike?

    @Moxxmix,
    That's an interesting take on it. Might want to have some clearer definition of what a normal effect versus a bonus effect is. For abilities like Green-Flame Blade and Booming Blade, normal effect is used to reference the weapon hit
    "On a hit, the target suffers the attack's normal effects, and..."
    And so a reasonable conclusion could be drawn that anything after the 'and' is the bonus effect.
    Using that logic, does that mean Sneak Attacks, Smites, Great Weapon Master, Sharp Shooter, etc, are all bonus effects too? Unless 'bonus' is used in the abilities description, or there is some wording what the cut off point is to the attacks normal effect, there's going to be a little back and forth over what does or does not qualify.
    Going for a general description like you have is a good approach, and one I've advocated for in this thread already. Just the wording used could still be touched up a bit to be more clear, more concrete.

  13. - Top - End - #133
    Halfling in the Playground
     
    RedKnightGirl

    Join Date
    Jan 2018

    Default Re: Fixing True Strike?

    Quote Originally Posted by Zhorn View Post
    @Moxxmix,
    That's an interesting take on it. Might want to have some clearer definition of what a normal effect versus a bonus effect is. For abilities like Green-Flame Blade and Booming Blade, normal effect is used to reference the weapon hit
    "On a hit, the target suffers the attack's normal effects, and..."
    And so a reasonable conclusion could be drawn that anything after the 'and' is the bonus effect.
    Using that logic, does that mean Sneak Attacks, Smites, Great Weapon Master, Sharp Shooter, etc, are all bonus effects too? Unless 'bonus' is used in the abilities description, or there is some wording what the cut off point is to the attacks normal effect, there's going to be a little back and forth over what does or does not qualify.
    Going for a general description like you have is a good approach, and one I've advocated for in this thread already. Just the wording used could still be touched up a bit to be more clear, more concrete.
    Yeah, the wording isn't the best.

    I was reluctant to allow it to affect an attack that uses GWM or SS because those bonuses are specifically gained due to sacrificing your to-hit chance. Bypassing the to-hit portion and still gaining the benefit feels too much like a cheat. I'm less sure how it should interact with things like Sneak Attack, Smite, Green-Flame Blade, etc. Those are normal aspects of an attack, but would be excluded if I remove the ability to add a 'bonus' effect to an attack result.

    I suppose an alternate way of building it would be something like:

    "While the spell is in effect, you may replace any attack roll you make with a result of 15. Once used in this way, the spell ends." (Increase the number of times it can be used at higher cantrip levels, as before.)

    Most attacks should hit if you roll a 15, although GWM/SS might still miss because they would then modify the roll to be a 10, and it also doesn't save you from being way out of your depth. Secondary effects would all still come into play, so you'd still get Sneak Attack, Smite, etc. Since it's a 15, it won't ever be a crit. It's sort of a way to make use of Concentration as a way to aim, making sure a swing doesn't miss as long as the caster can hold concentration.

    So, burn your Concentration slot to avoid missing an attack for as long as you can maintain it. Is that reasonable at Cantrip level?


    Math thoughts:

    Most hit rates for common stuff are vaguely around a 50% hit chance. That is, if you roll a 10, you're probably going to hit. Suppose you had a +5 to-hit, and needed to hit an AC of 15. Advantage will average a 14, disadvantage will average a 7. This version of True Strike would benefit the advantaged roll 20% of the time, the normal roll 50% of the time, and the disadvantaged roll 70% of the time. (The rest of the time, the original roll would have hit already.)

    If you manage four attacks during the combat, this would be useful to the person with advantage about 60% of the time, the normal attacker 95% of the time, and the disadvantaged attacker 99% of the time. More or less, you're trading one action at the start of the fight for the assurance that you can fix that time you're going to miss during the fight.

    Looking at the math, it's only a small benefit, since you're trading out one action to ensure another attack doesn't miss, and the results will tend to be a wash. (This includes accounting for higher levels, where you're trading a round of multi-attacks for multiple fixed misses.) However it's a nice benefit for the player, because unfortunate misses can be incredibly frustrating.

  14. - Top - End - #134
    Troll in the Playground
     
    Yakk's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2006

    Default Re: Fixing True Strike?

    True Strike
    Self
    Bonus action
    duration: Conc, up to 1 round.

    On your next turn, your first attack roll has advantage.

    ---

    I removed the target and made it a bonus action. It seems quite decent now; amazingly, not crazy OP due to concentration.

    Or divination:

    True Strike
    Self
    Bonus action
    duration: Conc, up to 1 round.

    Roll 1d20. On your next turn you can replace any attack roll with that die result.
    Last edited by Yakk; 2019-05-14 at 04:49 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •