D&D 3E/3.5 [3.5] countering Ray of Enfeeblement

[Simplicity]

Hmmmm... Quickened Ray of Enfeeblement followed up by a Ray of Enfeeblement sounds like a pretty darn cool attack. The party cleric is going to have a hard time casting any restoration spells without the strength to lift their own arms (Str 1 = toad strength... I would wonder if you could even use somatic components at this point).

 

[AuraSeer]

Originally posted by Simplicity
Hmmmm... Quickened Ray of Enfeeblement followed up by a Ray of Enfeeblement sounds like a pretty darn cool attack.

Multiple rays do not stack. The spell applies a penalty to your Strength score, and only the most severe penalty would be in effect.

(Str 1 = toad strength... I would wonder if you could even use somatic components at this point).

Yes, you can. Even at Str 1 you can still take all your normal actions. (Encumbrance is a pain in the mule, but it doesn't hinder spellcasting.) You only become helpless if your strength drops to 0, which ray of enfeeblement cannot do.

 

[wolfen]

Which brings up a new thread opportunity I'll create now.

What guideline WOULD you use to adjudicate extremely low strength? As my new thread might demonstrate, it's not as simple as it might seem.



wolfen

 

[Kershek]

It seems strange that you would be able to run at your full movement at str 1, for instance.

 

[Dakkareth]

No, it would render Ray of Enfeeblement absolutely moot ... incorporeal creatures have no Strength score!!!

Can't deal damage to something that isn't there, after all. Kinda like trying to deal CON damage to a contruct, or an undead critter. It just doesn't do anything.

... until your incorporeality runs out.

 

[LokiDR]

No, it would render Ray of Enfeeblement absolutely moot ... incorporeal creatures have no Strength score!!!

Can't deal damage to something that isn't there, after all. Kinda like trying to deal CON damage to a contruct, or an undead critter. It just doesn't do anything.

That isn't true, and you should know it. A manifest ghost with a ghost touch weapon is a very clear example of when it would indeed do something.

 

[the Jester]

Wouldn't Death Ward work as well, at higher levels?

I don't think that RoE is a negative energy attack, is it?

(checks)

Hm, doesn't say so. It is necromancy, though, which implies it's a negative energy attack... still, I'd say no.

 

[melkoriii]

At 10th level, it can be maximized to do 11 strength damage or empowered to do (1d6*1.5)+5 strength damage. There is no save.

Empower would be (1d6+5)*1.5 not (1d6*1.5)+5

The example in the feat says cure spells heal 1.5 of normal.

Cure spells are Xd8+lvl same setup as RoE

 

[Kershek]

Re: Re: [3.5] countering Ray of Enfeeblement

Empower would be (1d6+5)*1.5 not (1d6*1.5)+5

Empower Spell only multiplies the variable, numeric effects. The 1d6 is the variable part.

 

[Pax]

Re: Re: Re: [3.5] countering Ray of Enfeeblement

Empower Spell only multiplies the variable, numeric effects. The 1d6 is the variable part.

No.

The variable, numeric effect of the spell is [1d6+X], where X is half your caster level (to a maximumof +5). Just like with a critical hit, the whole random die code is multiplied.

1d6+5 is a die-code way of saying "a random number between 6 and 11".