Ray of Enfeeblement any good?

[wolfen]

Does anyone think this is an underrated spell? A 10th lvl sorceror (flying or on a flying mount) could drop a dragon from the sky with this 1st level spell and a couple metamagic feats. In practical play it's not going to happen because of SR and logistics. But no saving throw!

But still consider that a 10th lvl sorceror could reduce a monster's STR by an avg of 8.5 per ray (11 if maximized). In two rounds a 29STR monster (ie, Frost Giant) could have a STR of 12 or less. That's -8att/-8Dmg.

And if you want to capture an 18STR warrior instead of kill them, it's a lot easier if they have STR of 1.

I know there are better spells at higher levels, but for a 1st level spell this seems pretty cool.

Just a thought. What's your experience?

wolfen

 

[Gilwen]

In 3.5 i think they changed it to give a strength penalty and not damage. Which means the penalty from multiple castings won't stack...only the biggest penalty will apply.

Bryan

 

[AGGEMAM]

In 3.5 i think they changed it to give a strength penalty and not damage. Which means the penalty from multiple castings won't stack...only the biggest penalty will apply.

Bryan

That's the way it has always worked.

So the no stacking rules applies here (and no crits either).

 

[HeavyG]

In 3.5 i think they changed it to give a strength penalty and not damage. Which means the penalty from multiple castings won't stack...only the biggest penalty will apply.

You're right about 3.5, but it was that way in 3.0 too.

 

[wolfen]

Well that stinks. It should list that way in the spell description. It kinda burns me when they have certain spell descriptions that are more thorough and others that assume you know about rule x.y.


Thanks for the education.


wolfen

 

[Snipehunt]

It's still a cool spell b/c of the no save. You can make a low-str. person basically immobile - bring them from 10 to 1, or 14 to 5. You ever see a monk w/ encumbrance? Not pretty.

You can nerf a fighter, from 24 to 15 (a huge deal). It's on my list of "must haves" and makes necromancers look a little better.

It is pretty blah, though, for big, strong monsters.

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

Actually, I imagine it could be quite effective against strong monsters--especially those with multiple attacks. Sucking eight points of strength out of a five headed hydra cuts its damage potential by 30-50%. And dropping a monster from +9 to hit to +5 to hit makes a big difference too--especially when a lot of 4th-6th level PCs have an AC of 21-24. A PC with a 24 AC (12 dex, +1 fullplate, +1 shield, dodge feat or amulet of natural armor) still faces significant danger of being rended by a troll. However, if the troll is hit with a ray of enfeeblement, that danger drops significantly. (From a 6.3% to a 1% chance of rend each round). And it does less damage if it happens (21 points of average damage from two claws+rend instead of 35).

Hmm. With those calculations, I don't think there's any way I'm going to drop Necromancy from my Ftr/Wiz's arsenel when I convert him to 3.5. . . .

It's still a cool spell b/c of the no save. You can make a low-str. person basically immobile - bring them from 10 to 1, or 14 to 5. You ever see a monk w/ encumbrance? Not pretty.

You can nerf a fighter, from 24 to 15 (a huge deal). It's on my list of "must haves" and makes necromancers look a little better.

It is pretty blah, though, for big, strong monsters.

 

[Number47]

It also pretty much removes the option of power attacking, which can be very nasty for these big, strong creatures that would ordinarily have BAB to spare.

 

[Malachi of Kossuth]

Well that stinks. It should list that way in the spell description. It kinda burns me when they have certain spell descriptions that are more thorough and others that assume you know about rule x.y.


Thanks for the education.


wolfen

It actually uses ray of enfeeblement as an example of a spell that does not stack in the PHB 3.5. Is in the section before the actual spell listing. Forgot the page, but it sure would have been nice of WoTC to put in the spell description that it does not stack.

 

[Snipehunt]

Actually, I imagine it could be quite effective against strong monsters--especially those with multiple attacks. Sucking eight points of strength out of a five headed hydra cuts its damage potential by 30-50%. And dropping a monster from +9 to hit to +5 to hit makes a big difference too--especially when a lot of 4th-6th level PCs have an AC of 21-24. A PC with a 24 AC (12 dex, +1 fullplate, +1 shield, dodge feat or amulet of natural armor) still faces significant danger of being rended by a troll. However, if the troll is hit with a ray of enfeeblement, that danger drops significantly. (From a 6.3% to a 1% chance of rend each round). And it does less damage if it happens (21 points of average damage from two claws+rend instead of 35).

Hmm. With those calculations, I don't think there's any way I'm going to drop Necromancy from my Ftr/Wiz's arsenel when I convert him to 3.5. . . .

Oh, I agree - but it's particularly a killer when the mage is glued to the floor. The really strong things still get whittled down, I think that's obviousl, but I people overlook the effect the spell can have on weak creatures.