Is Ray of Enfeeblement too good?

[Hypersmurf]

Hmm...what about a house rule that states that the Str penalty only applies to attack and damage rolls for that person?

Strength checks and opposed Strength checks?

"I can't swing my sword to harm a fly, but I can still batter down this door, and ain't no way you're Tripping me!"

-Hyp.

 

[IndyPendant]

Ah, good call Hyp, thanks. Change my post to say then "What if RoE was houseruled so that the modification to strength did not affect Encumbrance? Then I think it would be balanced." : )

 

[juliaromero]

That reminds me of a related question. When are you too weak to carry your own bulk? What does having a 1 strength mean? And even if a human could move normally wiht no movement penalty, what about something like a big elder earth elemental. You'd think that a big hunk of solid rock like that would have a hard time moving itself anywhere with a 1 strength.

 

[Fisk]

This is also the reason that you can't sneak attack with it. It doesn't deal damage (hit point damage, ability damage, or negative levels), therefore it is not a weaponlike spell.

.

I was under the impression that it couldn't either until one of my players quoted the following form the WOTC site.

A successful sneak attack with a weaponlike spell inflicts extra damage according to the attacker's sneak attack ability, and the extra damage dealt is the same type as the spell deals. For example, a 10th-level rogue who makes a successful sneak attack with a Melf's acid arrow spell inflicts 2d4 points of acid damage, plus an extra 5d6 points of acid damage from the sneak attack (note that continuing damage from this spell is not part of the sneak attack). Spells that inflict energy drains or ability damage deal extra negative energy damage in a sneak attack, not extra negative levels or ability damage. For example, a 10th-level rogue who makes a successful sneak attack with an enervation spell deals 1d4 negative levels plus an extra 5d6 points of negative energy damage.

He sited the source as... http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20040309a

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

That reminds me of a related question. When are you too weak to carry your own bulk?

I think someone else said it best the last time this question was brought up.

Think of Strength as "Ability to move more than your own bulk."

Anything with any Strength score whatsoever can move its own bulk. The value of that Strength score determines how much past your own bulk you can carry.

Thus, if you have a Strength score of 1 - even if you're a gargantuan dragon - you've got the ability to move yourself. You just can't move much else beyond yourself.

 

[ThirdWizard]

I was under the impression that it couldn't either until one of my players quoted the following form the WOTC site.http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20040309a

Note the difference, ray of enfeeblment isn't abiltiy damage it is a penalty to the ability. So, it doesn't qualify for a Sneak Attack - they are two different things.

 

[TheEvil]

As noted, RoE gives a Strength penality, not damage.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

I was under the impression that it couldn't either until one of my players quoted the following form the WOTC site.

You can't sneak attack with a Ray of Enfeeblement because it doesn't do any damage.

Rather, it imposes a penalty.

Subtle, but important, difference.

The RoE penalty can be dispelled, and will disappear on its own when the spell expires.

Ability score damage can be healed (either naturally, over time, or via healing spells) but is otherwise permanent.

 

[Hypersmurf]

He sited the source as... http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20040309a

Yup. Which is pretty much exactly what was said in Tome and Blood when Weaponlike Spells were first defined, and what appears in Complete Arcane now.

And in Tome and Blood, along with that definition, they used Ray of Enfeeblement as an example of something that is not a weaponlike spell, since it doesn't deal hit point damage, ability damage, or negative levels.

-Hyp.

 

[Fisk]

I am not here to argue with you guys but how do you address this sentence..


Spells that inflict energy drains or ability damage deal extra negative energy damage in a sneak attack, not extra negative levels or ability damage. For example, a 10th-level rogue who makes a successful sneak attack with an enervation spell deals 1d4 negative levels plus an extra 5d6 points of negative energy damage.



What do you suppose WOTC is trying to say in that sentance when it talks about negative energy from spells that inflict "ability damage" ?