Ray of Enfeeblement any good?

[Elder-Basilisk]

AFAIK, it wasn't considered underpowered in 3E.

I considered it positively anemic in 3.0 It was a strength penalty--and therefore primarily useful against melee focussed foes. But it had a fort save which is a strong save for nearly every melee focussed foe. So, odds were good that--even assuming you managed to hit and score a decent strength penalty, any foe who was a good target would make the save.

Admit it: many people are now considering RoE to be a standard spell that they prepare, for use against any creature that relies on STR.

You bet. My main character's standard first level spells in 3.5 will include Ray of Enfeeblement. (Unless for some reason I decide necromancy is an acceptable banned school). And if you ask me, that's a good thing. Instead of preparing three magic missiles, a shield spell, and a true strike every day, it will be a shield spell, true strike, and a mixture of magic missiles and rays of enfeeblement.

It's a sign that there's now a greater number of effective strategies than there used to be. And that's a good thing.