It seems to me that ray of enfeeblement has to be the most powerful 1st level spell in the game - a no-save touch attack spell causing 1d6 +1 point/2 levels Strength damage for 1 minute/level. Typical targets (warrior types and large, strong creatures) are unlikely to have high touch AC, and each 2 points of Strength damage imposes a -1 penalty on attack and damage rolls (amongst other things). A 10th level caster will typically inflict a -4 penalty on attacks and damage - which would be fine for a 3rd level spell, for example, but it seems a bit over-the-top for a 1st level spell.
With that in mind, I have proposed a house rule that ray of enfeeblement has a Fortitude partial save. Typical targets will have a good Fortitude save and are likely to make the save, but will nevertheless still suffer half damage. I know this break convention for Fortitude saves (which are usually all-or-nothing affairs), but does this seem reasonable?
Note that this is a serious endeavour to balance the spell, not nerf it. I DM one campaign and play a wizard in another, and needless to say, my wizard PC always carries one or two rays of enfeeblement, so if I nerf the spell IMC, I'm going to shoot myself in the foot when my DM takes the same approach.
Cheers, Al'Kelhar
With that in mind, I have proposed a house rule that ray of enfeeblement has a Fortitude partial save. Typical targets will have a good Fortitude save and are likely to make the save, but will nevertheless still suffer half damage. I know this break convention for Fortitude saves (which are usually all-or-nothing affairs), but does this seem reasonable?
Note that this is a serious endeavour to balance the spell, not nerf it. I DM one campaign and play a wizard in another, and needless to say, my wizard PC always carries one or two rays of enfeeblement, so if I nerf the spell IMC, I'm going to shoot myself in the foot when my DM takes the same approach.
Cheers, Al'Kelhar