Is Ray of Enfeeblement too good?

[ThirdWizard]

That you can Sneak Attack with a spell that does ability damage?

Which Ray of Enfeeblment doesn't do.

Note: The short explaination in the wizard/sorcerer spells section is incorrect, unfortunately.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

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

Let's take, for instance, a hypothetical spell:

Weakling's Grasp
Necromancy
Level: Bard 1, Sor/Wiz 1
Components: V, S
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: Touch
Target: Living creature touched
Duration: Instantaneous
Saving Throw: None
Spell Resistance: Yes

You must succeed on a melee touch attack. Your touch deals 1d3+1 points of Strength damage to your target. This is a negative energy effect.

Now, if you were to hit with this spell, it could be a sneak attack. Notice the difference in wording?

Weakling's Grasp: "Your touch deals 1d3+1 points of Strength damage to your target."
Ray of Enfeeb: "The subject takes a penalty to Strength equal to 1d6+1 per two caster levels (maximum 1d6+5)."

 

[kenobi65]

Not a perfect example, because it doesn't use negative energy, but an example of an actual spell that does ability damage -- the druid spell Poison:

The poison deals 1d10 points of temporary Constitution damage immediately and another 1d10 points of temporary Constitution damage 1 minute later. Each instance of damage can be negated by a Fortitude save (DC 10 + 1/2 your caster level + your Wis modifier).

Note that it specifically uses the word "damage."

 

[Fisk]

You're not putting forth a very fact filled convincing arguement.


As I see it... I would argue with the player based on the example used in the WOTC refference. They used as an example Enervention.

The spell description says the EFFECT: Ray of Negative Energy


The Ray of Enfeelbement simply says. EFFECT: Ray


It seems pretty clear when you look at it that way doesn't it?

 

[Hypersmurf]

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

Exactly what it says. If the spell deals ability damage, you can sneak attack with it, and the sneak attack deals +Xd6 negative energy damage.

But Ray of Enfeeblement doesn't deal ability damage.

Compare:

Chill Touch
A touch from your hand, which glows with blue energy, disrupts the life force of living creatures. Each touch channels negative energy that deals 1d6 points of damage. The touched creature also takes 1 point of Strength damage unless it makes a successful Fortitude saving throw.

Cloudkill
A living creature with 6 or more HD takes 1d4 points of Constitution damage on your turn each round while in the cloud (a successful Fortitude save halves this damage). Holding one’s breath doesn’t help, but creatures immune to poison are unaffected by the spell.

Ray of Enfeeblement
A coruscating ray springs from your hand. The subject takes a penalty to Strength equal to 1d6+1 per two caster levels (maximum 1d6+5).

Chill Touch and Cloudkill inflict ability damage (it's instantaneous, it can't be dispelled, it stacks). Ray of Enfeeblement inflicts an ability penalty (it has a duration, it can be dispelled, it doesn't stack with itself).

One is damage (and thus counts towards eligibility for sneak attacks), one is not damage (and thus doesn't).

-Hyp.

 

[kenobi65]

Aha! Found one! Chill touch.

A touch from your hand, which glows with blue energy, disrupts the life force of living creatures. Each touch channels negative energy that deals 1d6 points of damage. The touched creature also takes 1 point of Strength damage unless it makes a successful Fortitude saving throw.

Since there's no variable involved in the Strength damage dealt, metamagic feats like Empower or Maximize wouldn't have an effect on that part of the spell, but it would look to qualify for the rogue doing extra Sneak Attack damage.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Not a perfect example, because it doesn't use negative energy...

It doesn't need to.

If a weaponlike spell deals ability damage, the sneak attack is negative energy damage.

If your spell says "You channel positive energy to overload an opponent's life force, dealing 1d6 points of charisma damage with a successful melee touch attack", you'd be eligible to sneak attack for +Xd6 points of negative energy damage to hit points.

-Hyp.

 

[Hypersmurf]

As I see it... I would argue with the player based on the example used in the WOTC refference. They used as an example Enervention.

The spell description says the EFFECT: Ray of Negative Energy

The Ray of Enfeelbement simply says. EFFECT: Ray

It seems pretty clear when you look at it that way doesn't it?

Uh... I'm sure it does.

But... um, what is it that seems pretty clear? You lost me on that one.

-Hyp.

 

[Fisk]

I think the key wording is "Negative energy"

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

What about it?