D&D 3E/3.5 Why did they nerf the "sleep" spell in 3.5?

[Li Shenron]

...and wait a day, so the draining has time to take effect...

I was kind of thinking that the negative level counted against your character level for the purpose of spell effects, but you are right... Sleep only matters about HD and not "levels".

 

[beaver1024]

Bingo.

If this is the reasoning why do greatswords do 2d6 + 1.5 str damage at 1st level. 1 swing could potentially be deadly to 90% of PC classes.

 

[Gizzard]

If this is the reasoning why do greatswords do 2d6 + 1.5 str damage at 1st level. 1 swing could potentially be deadly to 90% of PC classes.

Losing one guy out of your adventuring group is bad, but losing everyone is certainly worse! The 3E Sleep had the potential to clean out low level party with a lucky roll (and some unlucky saves). More important (IMHO) it was a spell that could turn an exciting fight against standard low-level foes into a ho-hum CDG party. Wizard: "I cast Sleep. I rolled an 8". DM: "6 Kobolds fall to the ground, asleep." Rest of Party: "I guess we CDG them and collect their loot?"

I've never seen Sleep taken in all the time playing or running 3e because it just didn't seem like a great spell now (compared to the old days - once per adventure automatically take out 4-16 orcs? Most excellent). In fact it didn't even seem like a good spell.

Well, different groups play differently I guess. Still, you can list the offensive spells that smoke multiple opponents at first level pretty quick: sleep, color spray and maybe hypnotism. Sleep is the clear winner there in 3E and I'd prefer it in 3.5E because of the range factor and the CDG potential. At least you could make an arguement for taking something else now though, which means to me that the spell is properly balanced.

Perhaps my group is just a bunch of 1E dinosaurs, but when we started 3E everyone wrote down Magic Missile and Sleep as their first two spells without having to consider it much. Magic Missile is the scalpel, Sleep is the mallet, same as it ever was.

 

[beaver1024]

At least you could make an arguement for taking something else now though, which means to me that the spell is properly balanced.

So I guess the only balanced spell is a useless spell then?

 

[shilsen]

So I guess the only balanced spell is a useless spell then?

I think what he means is that a balanced spell is one where it's not a no-brainer to take it.

 

[Treebore]

Everyone keeps forgetting the real game balance mechanic for the sleep spell and all other "over powered" spells. The DM. The sleep spell is never too deadly if the DM never uses it against the PC's when it would result in a TPK. That is the way I have done it since way back when. Kind of the Nuclear weapons policy. I won't use it if you don't. So when the party starts to use it the DM does. Of course having elves involved throws that kind of balance mechanism out the window. All elves should become a first level sorceror so they can go out and kill off all the other races by putting them all to sleep and coup de graceing them. There, you now have a single race world. Then the Drow use their deadly poisons to kill off all the other elves. There, evil wins!

 

[milotha]

The new motto is: "If anyone is using it, it must be too powerful." Thus it gets nerfed. I seriously question many of the spell changes that they enacted from 3.0 to 3.5. With saves for every spell, spell resistance, attacks of opportunity, counterspells, and numerous other things, there are so many ways to counter wizard's spells, why did we need to do these changes. The quest for "balance" is destroying the game. Maybe instead of nerfing the few spells that wizards always take in an attempt to "balance" things, maybe they should be raising some of the other less comonly used spells.

 

[Psiblade]

Insta death spells got toned down in 3.5. Damage spells went the other direction with scorching ray, ray of enfeeblement, and cloudkill ! Cloudkill in a small area with no place for the cloud to go was devasting to my group.

-Psiblade

 

[Gizzard]

I think what he means is that a balanced spell is one where it's not a no-brainer to take it.

Yes, absolutely! (Was my original post really that unclear!?)

Anyway, for those people who are claiming 3.5E Sleep is "useless", what mass-kill spell are you taking in its place? To me, Color Spray doesn't have the range and it doesn't totally incapacitate your foe like Sleep does. So I'd prefer to take Sleep. Hypnotism is interesting depending on how agreeable you expect your DM to be, though it suffers from the same unpredictability of classic Sleep spells -- that it affects 2d4 of creatures. I can see taking either spell though.

My point is that even in 3.5E a good percentage of mages will still take Sleep in their first round of spells. It wont be 99%, unlike 3E or 1E, because the spell is more balanced with the rest of the 1st level spells.

Maybe instead of nerfing the few spells that wizards always take in an attempt to "balance" things, maybe they should be raising some of the other less comonly used spells.

That's an idea, but frankly, mages do not need a power-up. They already dominate the game at high levels; they aren't suffering from being ineffective as a class!

 

[Terath Ninir]

Don't forget that there's now Deep Slumber which puts 10 HD to sleep.

Oh, no, I think we can forget *that* one pretty easily. Let's see -- a 3rd level spell, takes a full round to cast, and maybe takes down two enemies. More likely just one. Or I can take fireball. No contest there! Fireball all the way. Even as a bard, I wouldn't bother with deep slumber. By the time *they* get it, they're 7th level, so it's already past what little prime it had.

I hate to throw chip, but all the "balance" arguments I've seen here are of the "if anyone would want the spell, it's unbalanced" variety. Balancing a spell this way is exactly like putting a human on the same footing with a halfling by chopping his legs off. Making something useless does not balance it. At all.