Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Noti Animboa 07-02-06, 11:21 AM	Basically how much would you make one cost with: 1/day 3/day 4/day and finally at will. Thank You, Noti Animboa
LittleCarp04 07-02-06, 11:27 AM	if your dm (or you if you are one) would allow an item that did true strike at will, well then can i please play in your game :)
Noti Animboa 07-02-06, 11:31 AM	i know its rediculous...im more worried about 1/day 3/day etc. although at will would be cool i do know that its powerful...but what about at will with like 25 or 50 charges.
LordKudzu 07-02-06, 01:50 PM	Technically the cost would be rather low as truestrike is a level one spell. However, the implications of this spell are rather *huge*. As a DM, I'd be afraid of this but might allow it albiet under certain circumstances al a created by a wish. Of course the PCs will wade through the low level minions of the villianous blackguard but he wears full-plate enchanted with a new spell truearmour which adds +20 to his AC. You get to fight him on even ground now. However, it becomes a much more one-sided battle as you are facing him alone so your item useage is rewarded and the battle affected just not in the way that you totally intended. Also remember that truestrike doesn't guarantee that you pierce DR.
wonlee76 07-02-06, 02:31 PM	You know, I'm not so concerned about a 1/day (or 3/day or whatever) type of true strike ability. Its the "constant" true strike effect or "at will" effect that is the worrisome part. Presuming the item still takes a standard action to activate, I would honestly follow the guidelines set forth in the DMG for something like this. Afterall, you can have a wand of true strike which doesn't seem to raise too many concerns.
utilitarian 07-02-06, 02:37 PM	Not another "Magic item of true strike" thread >_< I die a little inside whenever these show up. Bottom line: True Strike x number of times per day = ok True Strike always on = NO!
__DnD4Life__ 07-02-06, 02:53 PM	True Strike x number of times per day = ok True Strike always on = NO! Agreed, which is why I will not price the 'at will' ability, but the other 3 should be OK. 1/day - SL*CL*1800*(1/5) 1*1*1800*(1/5)=360GP 3/day - SL*CL*1800*(3/5) 1*1*1800*(3/5)=1080GP 4/day - SL*CL*1800*(4/5) 1*1*1800*(4/5)=1440GP Now, these are incredibly cheap, so as a DM, I would bump them up a little, considering the spell being used.
kalstrand 07-02-06, 02:58 PM	At will isn't that big of a problem as long as it still takes a Standard Action to activate and only works for the next attack. The problem comes when you try to give the Truestrike to every attack. I would allow the Barb in my game to take the at will Truestrike item. He will be able to hit with 1 or 2 attacks every other round. If he was simply making full attacks in those 2 rounds he would most likely hit 2-4 times for twice as much damage. Plus in the meantime he is standing in a threatened area doing nothing or he could leave the threatened area likely provoking attacks of opportunity.
LordKudzu 07-02-06, 03:08 PM	I'm thinking about it more and more and with the BAB rate versus the AC rate as high as it is then truestriking on your first iterative attack really isn't all that unbalancing. Let's say that the ring gives +20 to hit on the first strike in an iterative chain. Now this is very powerful at low levels where you will often miss due to the higher ACs of most monsters. Once you hit double digits then your to hit modifier should be much higher than most monster's ACs and it is only the later iterative attacks that have a chance of missing. So the end result is that the first attack which was going to hit anyway (most likely) is going to still hit even more and the later hits have as much a chance of missing. Further if you are Power Attacking then your chance to hit those later iteratives is only going to go further down. The ring of truestrike is very useful for something like whirlwinding when as a DM I would rule that you'd get the +20 to each target, but again you'd be likely to hit on those attacks anyway at higher levels. That being said, I guess the lower prices would be acceptable because this would be an item geared for lower level play and would rapidly become obsolete.
utilitarian 07-02-06, 03:26 PM	Agreed, which is why I will not price the 'at will' ability, but the other 3 should be OK. Now, these are incredibly cheap, so as a DM, I would bump them up a little, considering the spell being used. They are pretty cheap, but then again it is still a 1st level spell. Whoever has this item still needs to take an action to activate it (forfitting all thier attacks that turn) so they have ONE +20 attack next turn. A fair trade. I'm personally against adjusting proper by the book item values, even if the item created seems more valuable than the cost would suggest. It just means it's a very smart item to have made.
RavenDrake 07-02-06, 06:40 PM	'm personally against adjusting proper by the book item values, even if the item created seems more valuable than the cost would suggest. Propper, by the book values? Uh... the guidelines specifically state that an Item should be priced according to an existing item or effect that mimics it's abilities first and foremost, then, as a last resort, you use the spell level formula, and adjucate as necessary. Truestrike is a Bonus to melee attacks, closest pure ability is the Enhancement bonus to weapons (Bonus^2 x 2000gp). It dosen't add a bonus to damage, however, so we can reduce that a bit, but it is an insight bonus (which are pretty rare, and stack with all the normal bonuses to hit, like Morale, Enhancement, etc), to will give it a 25% discount, then divide by charges for a standard action activation. (20^2 x 1500) / (5/1) = 120,000gp (20^2 x 1500) / (5/3) = 361,446gp (20^2 x 1500) / (5/5) = 600,000gp Now, those prices seem riduculously expensive. And they are. Stop trying to abuse the first level spells with the ridiculous spell level chart... There are some spells which simply should not be allowed to be made into items. Of course, WotC could simplify things greatly if they'd just come out and state, flat out, that personal range spells can't be made into ANY magic items whatsoever....
Machin_shin 07-02-06, 08:00 PM	For me, truestrike has always seemed to be quite useful, especially for a character using a mount.. Lance, Check. Mount, Check. Truestrike, Check. Especially since a lance is a two-handed weapon (2 damage for 1 to hit with power attack) and a nice ride-by-attack later, the enemy should be a bloody pulp, or if it survived that, keep running! Another use of the spell is to cast it, then disarm your opponent. +20 on your disarm check is never wrong.. especially if you're unarmed. Voila! You have the enemy's weapon, and he is (hopefully) unarmed. Let the chopfest begin. Sunder anyone? I mean, with that bonus to hit, you can probably power attack as much as you can, and still hit the bloody weapon! Die, inanimate object!
Merestil Haye 07-02-06, 08:05 PM	Truestrike is a Bonus to melee attacks, closest pure ability is the Enhancement bonus to weapons (Bonus^2 x 2000gp). It dosen't add a bonus to damage, however, so we can reduce that a bit, but it is an insight bonus (which are pretty rare, and stack with all the normal bonuses to hit, like Morale, Enhancement, etc), to will give it a 25% discount, then divide by charges for a standard action activation.This method of adjudication leads to worse results than the formula found in the book. Calcuating on the basis of a continuous item, then multiplying by uses per day / 5, does not give reasonable values for any such item. If you tell me that a continuous item costs x, something that works 3 times per day for one round maximum each is not woth 0.6x. A continuously functioning item of True Strike costs in the region of 4-8 million gold pieces. A 5/day command-word item activated as a standard action does not.
__DnD4Life__ 07-02-06, 11:39 PM	A continuously functioning item of True Strike costs in the region of 4-8 million gold pieces. A 5/day command-word item activated as a standard action does not. Actually, it is closer to 800,000GP(20*20*2000GP). Which, obviously, is way past epic. Your +5 vorpal Truestrike weapon will be at about level 40, if not higher.
Jay_Ibero_911 07-03-06, 01:11 AM	This topic has made me think of cheese...cleric with elf, fate, or time domain using DMMP on true strike...arg, munchkination! On a more related note, could one conevieably get an item of quickened true strike 1/day for 16200gp? 5x9x1800x1/5? Actually seems reasonable to get in one good hit a day without using an action.
Merestil Haye 07-03-06, 05:19 AM	Actually, it is closer to 800,000GP(20*20*2000GP). Which, obviously, is way past epic. Your +5 vorpal Truestrike weapon will be at about level 40, if not higher.Epic guidelines state that if an item is epic because it grants a bonus of > +5 to hit, multiply the price by 10. You did not. The price of such an item is in the millions.
Thane26425 07-03-06, 05:29 AM	You could create scrolls of Truestrike or a Wand of Truestrike and place said item in a Glove of Casting. Those gloves allow the wearer to call upon the effect of any spell completion item such as scrolls, potions and wands, that are placed within it (full description in the DMG 2). This would be a "legal" way to use Truestrike frequently, though it would be limited to arcane spell casters.
aelryinth 07-03-06, 07:05 PM	For me, truestrike has always seemed to be quite useful, especially for a character using a mount.. Lance, Check. Mount, Check. Truestrike, Check. Especially since a lance is a two-handed weapon (2 damage for 1 to hit with power attack) and a nice ride-by-attack later, the enemy should be a bloody pulp, or if it survived that, keep running! Another use of the spell is to cast it, then disarm your opponent. +20 on your disarm check is never wrong.. especially if you're unarmed. Voila! You have the enemy's weapon, and he is (hopefully) unarmed. Let the chopfest begin. Sunder anyone? I mean, with that bonus to hit, you can probably power attack as much as you can, and still hit the bloody weapon! Die, inanimate object! You obviously don't know that if you use a lance two handed on a mounted charge, you lose the benefits of the lance on the charge (increased threat, increased crit multi), in return for your greater str bonus and power attack. When used in a charge atop a mount, a lance is a one handed weapon. The increaed threat chances, etc, are to balance out the fact you don't get the extra bonuses, not in addition to it. And yes, this is an errata ruling. Which is why you don't see it in the Uber Charger the way you are writing it. ===Aelryinth
JadeSpider9643 07-04-06, 07:51 AM	It's always been my thought that since True Strike is a personal range spells that it's only avaliable to wizards/sorcs and as such so should the item be. Now this is not general convention for other spells put into items, but for true strike i'd make an exception and say that any item that generates a true strike effect is usable only by arcane spell casters.
DMStevo 07-05-06, 02:50 PM	Use the Correct Formula: One item people frequently ask me about is a ring oftrue strike. The spell provides a whopping +20 insight bonus on attack rolls and negates miss chances arising from concealed targets. It's only 1st level, however, because it is a personal range spell with a duration of 1 round. That means you can normally manage one attack every 2 rounds when using the spell. Also, you can't bestow it on an ally (except for a familiar or animal companion) because of its personal range. Assuming such a ring worked whenever it was needed and has a caster level of 1st, it would cost a mere 2,000 gp by the formula for a use-activated spell effect (in this case, 1 x 1 x 2,000 gp). Sharp-eyed readers will note that any continuously functioning item has a cost adjustment of x4 (see the footnotes to Table 7-33), which bumps up the ring's cost to 8,000 gp. That's a real bargain for an item that provides so much boost to a user's combat power. Much too great a bargain. So, what would our example ring of true strike be worth? Insight bonuses aren't included on Table 7-33, but a weapon bonus has a cost equal to the bonus squared x 2,000 gp, so a +20 weapon would cost 800,000 gp. One can argue that the ring isn't quite as good as a +20 weapon because it doesn't provide a damage bonus. That, however, ignores the very potent ability to negate most miss chances. Also, the ring's insight bonus works with any sort of attack the wearer makes. On top of all that, the insight bonus stacks with any enhancement bonus from a magic weapon the wearer might wield. Still, 800,000 gp is a lot of cash and the lack of a damage bonus is significant, so some price reduction is in order. A 50% reduction might be in order, or 400,000 gp for the ring. Would you pay 400,000 gp for a ring of true striking? I would if I could afford it. At a price of 400,000 gp, our mythical ring of true strike is something only an epic-level character could afford. That's fine, because epic play is where the ring belongs. Discussion over. :w00t: