Touch of Idiocy in action

[shilsen]

So has anybody yet seen this spell in use?

With a 1d6 penalty to Int, Wis and Cha, it seems like this is one of the best ways to shut down a caster's higher-level spells. Sure, you have to get up close and get through with a melee touch attack (not too difficult usually), but once you're up close and personal this works a lot better than some of the standard anti-caster tactics (readying an action, etc.).

Opinions?

 

[Thanee]

I don't think it is that bad, unless the ability damage stacks (which I assume does not).

Even with a -6 (or -9 empowered) to his primary ability a caster should be able to cast the highest level spells, altho at a lower DC. Still the benefit is there, but the spell can hardly shut down a dedicated caster or even prevent him from using any spells.

Of course, in magic-light campaigns, where not everyone has at least a +4 ability enhancing item at moderately high levels, the spell can be more potent.

I think the most obvious use is offensively to lower a victims Will save.

Bye
Thanee

 

[ruleslawyer]

It's not ability damage; it's a penalty, so no, it doesn't stack.

Thanee: I'd disagree about the best use being to lower an opponent's Will save. IMHO, the best use is to deprive a spellcaster of his higher-level spells. As such, I don't think the spell is that potent, since even though it affects not one, but three ability scores, only one of those scores is likely to be relevant to a particular situation. Still, touch of idiocy plus arcane or divine reach is a very, very nifty combo for a 2nd-level spell.

 

[Li Shenron]

Even with a -6 (or -9 empowered) to his primary ability a caster should be able to cast the highest level spells, altho at a lower DC. Still the benefit is there, but the spell can hardly shut down a dedicated caster or even prevent him from using any spells.

I hope you meant his LOWER level spells . Remember that it is a 2nd level spell only!

I think it is quite powerful for its level. Of course, Silence is 2nd level too, but in fact I think that's also very powerful. At low level, it's very worth to try this spell against an enemy spellcaster (who is probably quite low level too...). I think this spell possibly deserved a save. Or maybe lower the duration to 1round/level, so that it may end before the combat finish.

Ok but maybe you are right and that's not too terrible anyway: at 3rd level you need only a 12 to cast your highest-level spells, so even if you don't have 18 this spell usually won't prevent you that...

edit: yes if it was ability damage that would be definitely worse!

 

[TuDogz]

Touch of Idiocy makes me weep. True dastardly beauty.

Empowered or maximized and then used in combination with ability damage causing poisons. You can soften up a sorc, wiz or cleric in their off stats and then stick em with the right knife and its coma-land. The fact that they might loose a little spell access is just icing.

It is also exceptionally useful empowered or maximized against your huge stupid fighter types. Even if they don't go down to coma they often become incapable of any tactical consideration.

At it's base level casting, the 1d6 is too unlikey to be useful and there are better options for the action however.





edit: oops... changed heightened to empowered... got too excited

 

[The Souljourner]

The fact that it is a melee touch attack really balances it out. How many mages do you know of that are ever in the front lines? Clerics, sure, but I've never seen a wizard that didn't constantly back up during a fight Needing to touch someone to use this spell really mediates it's power.

I think people underestimate the drawback of touch spells (of both flavors). Just last Wednesday night I saw our cleric shoot a searing light at a vampire.... and miss.

And against someone with a +4 item to their best stat... on average it doesn't even cancel out the item. So... it's good but not overpowered.

-The Souljourner

 

[Thanee]

It's not ability damage; it's a penalty, so no, it doesn't stack.

Ah yes, you are right of course. That's clear then!

Thanee: I'd disagree about the best use being to lower an opponent's Will save. IMHO, the best use is to deprive a spellcaster of his higher-level spells. As such, I don't think the spell is that potent, since even though it affects not one, but three ability scores, only one of those scores is likely to be relevant to a particular situation. Still, touch of idiocy plus arcane or divine reach is a very, very nifty combo for a 2nd-level spell.

Yep, the loss of some high level spells can hurt, too.

But does it actually remove those spells (since it only is a penalty to the ability and not actual damage/drain)?

Bye
Thanee

 

[Thanee]

The fact that it is a melee touch attack really balances it out. How many mages do you know of that are ever in the front lines? Clerics, sure, but I've never seen a wizard that didn't constantly back up during a fight Needing to touch someone to use this spell really mediates it's power.

Spectral Hand!

Bye
Thanee

 

[Thanee]

I hope you meant his LOWER level spells

Actually I meant exactly what I've written there...

Bye
Thanee

 

[Bauglir]

Not many fighters will have an int much higher than 13. Touch of Idiocy can shut down lots of feats and depending on your interpretation could potentially even shut down abilities from PrCs that have those feats as prerequisites..