PDA

View Full Version : Ray of enfeeblement neutralizing power attack?



ken-do-nim
2007-03-25, 04:19 PM
Since you need 13 strength to use power attack, would you agree that an 18 strength fighter ray of enfeebled for 6 points would no longer be able to use power attack?

Khantalas
2007-03-25, 04:22 PM
Well, um, probably not. After all, he's weaker than he once was.

However, ray of enfeeblement is a penalty to strength. Not damage or drain. Maybe that makes a difference.

I have no idea, honestly.

Variable Arcana
2007-03-25, 04:25 PM
SRD says:
A character can’t use a feat if he or she has lost a prerequisite. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/feats.htm#prerequisites)
So, I'd say, yep.

Ray of Enfeeblement -- the gift that keeps on taking.

The Valiant Turtle
2007-03-25, 04:34 PM
I'm trying to find a reference in the SRD or on Wizards site. I can't find one at the moment, but I do believe you are correct.

^ looks like somebody found it.

ken-do-nim
2007-03-25, 09:34 PM
I'm trying to find a reference in the SRD or on Wizards site. I can't find one at the moment, but I do believe you are correct.

^ looks like somebody found it.

Right but the question is, does a penalty mean you no longer meet the prereq.

Quietus
2007-03-25, 09:38 PM
Yes, albeit temporarily. Just as you can qualify for a feat by using items that give an enhancement bonus, you can lose qualification for it by taking a penalty.

Shhalahr Windrider
2007-03-25, 10:16 PM
Right but the question is, does a penalty mean you no longer meet the prereq.
Indeed. The penalty actually makes your example character's Strength 12 for the duration of the spell. The prerequisite is a Strength of 13. The character no longer meets the prerequisite.

Aximili
2007-03-25, 10:34 PM
Right but the question is, does a penalty mean you no longer meet the prereq.
Well, it always sounded odd to me, but you can meet Stats prerequisites by using magic items that give you a bonus to that stats. So the reverse should be true with a penalty.

KoDT69
2007-03-25, 10:36 PM
Yes, albeit temporarily. Just as you can qualify for a feat by using items that give an enhancement bonus, you can lose qualification for it by taking a penalty.

This is one of those big oversights that WotC let slide through. Not only is using magic items to qualify for feats cheesey, but it doesn't make sense at all. Same thing with the Ray of Enfeeblecheese having no saving throw and being 1st freaking level. WOW let's just hand wizards a win button just for picking the wizard class. None of my players would even consider pulling that crap with me. And if it's a penalty, not a drain, I would say that it does not actually change the score, and therefore unable to "unqualify" you for your feat selection. But why would the fighter be power attacking with 10 less STR now anyways? Can't be a good option :smallconfused:

Variable Arcana
2007-03-25, 10:40 PM
So... does that mean that fatigue (-2 penalty to strength and dex) can make feats like Power Attack and Rapid Shot go away temporarily??

ken-do-nim
2007-03-25, 10:42 PM
But why would the fighter be power attacking with 10 less STR now anyways? Can't be a good option :smallconfused:

It's really not for power attack. There are a whole horde of feats that it is the prereq for: cleave, leap attack, improved sunder, improved bull rush, etc.

So a little ray of enfeeblement action, and a fighter's entire feat chain could be history. I don't like it. I think it is simple enough to decide that penalty does not equal drain, but it would be nice to know what the official rule is.

Zherog
2007-03-25, 11:44 PM
Same thing with the Ray of Enfeeblecheese having no saving throw and being 1st freaking level. WOW let's just hand wizards a win button just for picking the wizard class.

Funny you should mention this. My third level wizard fired off one of these at the raging barbarian this evening. And missed.

There's no save because it requires an attack roll. And if the attack roll misses, the spell is wasted.

Yes, touch ACs suck horribly. But so does a wizard's BAB.

ken-do-nim
2007-03-25, 11:47 PM
Funny you should mention this. My third level wizard fired off one of these at the raging barbarian this evening. And missed.

There's no save because it requires an attack roll. And if the attack roll misses, the spell is wasted.

Yes, touch ACs suck horribly. But so does a wizard's BAB.

That reminds me. Last year, someone posted a house rule they used for ranges for ray spells. I thought it was pretty good and a long overdue rule. I can't find it via searching though. I remember there were close, medium, and long varieties. I think the close range increment was 40 feet. Anyway, if anyone has rules for this or can find the old post it would be much appreciated.

Innis Cabal
2007-03-26, 12:00 AM
touch AC's suck...but a high dex fix's all.....they balance...a level 10 sor/wiz should not miss the large dragon...thats just bad form

Suzaku
2007-03-26, 12:32 AM
pfft if the dragon worth its age would learn scintillating scales or have a ring of it. If that dragon doesn't it deserves to die a horrible death >.>. Btw it's just a second level spell...

Vik
2007-03-26, 03:47 AM
If the dragon has a CR according to PC levels, then a mere Dispell Magic will be enough to remove all his spells (dragons have CL offset by about 7 to 10 regarding their CR). Ray of enfeeblement is one of the very best 1st level spells, that's for sure, even if rays might prove trickiest to land than one could think - Dex is your 3rd stat, creatures are often in melee with your meat shield (so you're at -4 and they possibly have cover), and so on.

its_all_ogre
2007-03-26, 03:52 AM
i personally would make them not use power attack while their STR is reduced.
i personally would not allow stat boosts from items to allow grabbing a feat, i honestly did not know this was the rule, and i certainly do not want to let it slide.

Lord Lorac Silvanos
2007-03-26, 04:01 AM
So a little ray of enfeeblement action, and a fighter's entire feat chain could be history. I don't like it. I think it is simple enough to decide that penalty does not equal drain, but it would be nice to know what the official rule is.

Penalty does not equal drain, but that does not change the fact that the RAW has already been supplied whether you like it.

Boost your Strength or touch AC if you worry greatly about it.

AtomicKitKat
2007-03-26, 04:59 AM
This, kiddies, is why Ray of Enfeeblement coupled with Ray of Exhaustion rock.
Just tack on a Power Word Weaken and you're set. ;)

Edit: Because Fatigue is stuperior to Exhaustion, duh. Replace with Sicken for even more bagging.

Indon
2007-03-26, 05:16 AM
It strikes me that you're unlikely to drop the strength of a power attack-specialized warrior/barbarian/whatever below 13, since strength is likely to be their highest stat if, well, they're spec'ed to power attack.

Maybe with a lucky roll on Ray of Enfeeblement at like, character level 2 or 3, but stat bonuses to strength (well, assuming a stat point every 4'th level going into strength), magical items, and just plain adventurous rigor will probably keep the strength of such a meleer above the threshold required to drop him below 13 even with magic availible at that level.

Now, two-weapon fighting (edit: with some kind of dex penalty spell that is), on the other hand...

KoDT69
2007-03-26, 06:52 AM
I houserule that temporary effects can not affect skills or feats already learned. Sure you can't power attack now, but does that make you less likely to score a critical hit? Seriously, think about it. Just because it's a feat required doesn't mean you must use it. Does Devastating Critical only kick in on rounds when you also use Power Attack? Not even close. So for my games, Ray of Enfeeblecheese can't make the Barbarian unskilled. He's still coming to get that pesky hedge wizard. Hope he's got more rays prepared! I seriously doubt that WotC even for a second put 2 and 2 together on feat requirements and ray of enfeeblecheese to realise even a touch AC with no save is totally unbalanced if it can also deny you your trained combat skills. Blech :smallfurious:

Lord Lorac Silvanos
2007-03-26, 07:31 AM
Note that just because you lose or does not meet the prerequisite and cannot use the feat you still have it for the purpose of qualifying for other feats, so unless these feats have the same prerequisite that you just lost you can still use those feats.

KoDT69
2007-03-26, 07:40 AM
But if you lose Power Attack, you also lose all those that required Power Attack to gain right? :smallconfused:

Shhalahr Windrider
2007-03-26, 07:49 AM
But if you lose Power Attack, you also lose all those that required Power Attack to gain right? :smallconfused:
No. You still have Power Attack. You just cannot use it.

Of course, most feats that have Power Attack as a prerequisite also have Strength 13 (or higher) as a prerequisite, too. Pretty much any feat that has another feat as a prerequisite has the second feat's prerequisites as well.

So getting your Strength reduced to 12 or lower eliminates your ability to use your Cleave, but it has nothing to do with your inability to use Power Attack and everything to do with your reduced Strength.

Lord Lorac Silvanos
2007-03-26, 07:50 AM
No, only if they also have the same STR requirement.

Take Improved Sunder (and many others) as an example.

Prerequisites: Str 13, Power Attack.

It has both Str 13 and PA as prerequisites. If you were to be reduced below 13 in STR you would NOT lose the benefits of Improved Sunder because you lost access to PA.
However, you would lose access because of the reduction in STR.


Most feats inherits the base prerequisites of the first feat in the chain, but this is not the case for all of them.

EDIT: Combat Brute is an example of a feat you can still use even if your Str is reduced below 13 and it has both PA and Imp. Sunder as prerequisites.

kamikasei
2007-03-26, 07:55 AM
But if you lose Power Attack, you also lose all those that required Power Attack to gain right? :smallconfused:

You don't lose Power Attack. You still have the feat. You lose the use of Power Attack, temporarily, because you no longer have the strength to pull it off.

Power Attack is a prerequisite for Cleave, but you don't have to Power Attack in combat in order to use Cleave.

KoDT69
2007-03-26, 07:58 AM
So this ability to deny feats, an intrinsic bonus for the mage, still seems unbalanced for a 1st level spell...

Lord Lorac Silvanos
2007-03-26, 07:59 AM
Power Attack is a prerequisite for Cleave, but you don't have to Power Attack in combat in order to use Cleave.

You still need STR 13 though.


CLEAVE [GENERAL]
Prerequisites: Str 13, Power Attack.


Combat Brute from Complete warrior is an example of a feat you could still use even though your STR has dropped. It has both PA and Imp. Sunder as prerequisites, but not Str 13.

Lord Lorac Silvanos
2007-03-26, 08:07 AM
So this ability to deny feats, an intrinsic bonus for the mage, still seems unbalanced for a 1st level spell...

It requires a touch attack, uses up half of the 1st level Wizard's 1st level spells, and still requires a roll to determine the magnitude of the penalty.
Chances are that even if you are hit you won't be denied the use of your feats from this spell alone.

Shhalahr Windrider
2007-03-26, 08:13 AM
So this ability to deny feats, an intrinsic bonus for the mage, still seems unbalanced for a 1st level spell...
As opposed to being able to kill (magic missile, burning hands, or even, Pelor forbid, acid splash) or leave your opponents at your mercy (sleep)?

And denying the use of a feat is contingent on several factors, none of which are a given:
Your opponent has a feat with a Strength prerequisite.
You hit your opponent's touch AC.
You overcome your opponent's spell resistance (if any).
You inflict a large enough penalty to reduce your opponent's Strength below the feat's prerequisite.


Combat Brute from Complete warrior is an example of a feat you could still use even though your STR has dropped. It has both PA and Imp. Sunder as prerequisites, but not Str 13.
Ah, I was hoping someone would find a feat such as this. Nice to know there are a few feats out there that don't have every prerequisite daisy chained in.

KoDT69
2007-03-26, 08:24 AM
Hmm, so at 1st level like you say, the Burning Hands or Magic Missile damage of a whopping 1d4+1 is worse? I don't buy it. Especially in a situation where you want to take them prisoner to extract information. If you burn em to death, they can't talk. And if you roll max of 7 points drained, the only 1st level NORMAL character still remaining at 13 STR would be a base 20 Half-Orc. I'm not considering extra races, I'm sure a +25 LA Warforged Charger Spellwarped Celestial Half-Dragon Barbarian will be fine (and I'm exaggerating before anyone destroys this build, it's for the sake of argument :smallbiggrin:). The human fighter with a 13 STR is completely destroyed by even that. His 50lbs+ armor and 20lbs shield will be too much when his STR is lower than a goblin's! Oh well, play it RAW or whatever. I exclude the feat requirement thing altogether. Especially the "magic items can let you qualify" bullcrap. We all know the RAW is broken in spots, and nobody can say the completely follow RAW anyways. Too many unwritten things that can happen and the DM instinctively fills in the gaps. Can't deny it! :smallbiggrin:

Starbuck_II
2007-03-26, 08:34 AM
Hmm, so at 1st level like you say, the Burning Hands or Magic Missile damage of a whopping 1d4+1 is worse? I don't buy it. Especially in a situation where you want to take them prisoner to extract information. If you burn em to death, they can't talk. And if you roll max of 7 points drained, the only 1st level NORMAL character still remaining at 13 STR would be a base 20 Half-Orc. I'm not considering extra races, I'm sure a +25 LA Warforged Charger Spellwarped Celestial Half-Dragon Barbarian will be fine (and I'm exaggerating before anyone destroys this build, it's for the sake of argument :smallbiggrin:). The human fighter with a 13 STR is completely destroyed by even that. His 50lbs+ armor and 20lbs shield will be too much when his STR is lower than a goblin's! Oh well, play it RAW or whatever. I exclude the feat requirement thing altogether. Especially the "magic items can let you qualify" bullcrap. We all know the RAW is broken in spots, and nobody can say the completely follow RAW anyways. Too many unwritten things that can happen and the DM instinctively fills in the gaps. Can't deny it! :smallbiggrin:

Um, the Fighter only has 13? What! Why so low?
70 pounds=heavy load for 7 strength. But hey, it only lasts 1 minute if 1st level.

Lord Lorac Silvanos
2007-03-26, 08:37 AM
1st level:

Assuming the fighter/Barbarian/Brute has 18 STR, 12 DEX and that the Wizard has 14 DEX.

RoE penalty CL1: 1d6

So not only does the Wizard have to roll maximum penalty, but there is only a 60 % chance of actually hitting with the RoE.

That equals a 10 % chance that the Fighter type will lose the use of PA as a result of the 1st level Wizard using RoE.

Chances for sleep working (unless it is an elf) are much higher and far more crippling.

headwarpage
2007-03-26, 08:39 AM
As has been said, the wizard has to hit the fighter's touch AC first. At level 1, that's probably a 50-50 chance, give or take a little depending on the dex of both characters. And then the fighter is still far from dead. A reasonably strong 1st level fighter won't be out of comission from a single ray of enfeeblement, and the wizard has used half his spells for the day. And depending on what the wizard's other spell is, a 1st level fighter with a Str of 10 can still easily take down a 1st level wizard. One hit with the greatsword will do it, most times.

I'll grant you that the fighter might be encumbered after being enfeebled, especially if he was carrying a decent load to begin with, but he'll very rarely be incapacitated. Sleep, on the other hand, will incapacitate the fighter completely, and the chances of him failing his Will save are probably better than the chances of the wizard hitting the touch attack for ray of enfeeblement anyway.

Empowered/maximized/twinned/whatever ray of enfeeblement coupled with a ray of exhaustion, however, is useful. But you're not doing that sort of thing at level 1.

ken-do-nim
2007-03-26, 08:40 AM
Just so you know, this issue did not come up in the context of 1st level play. It came up with an 8th level wizard who owns a lesser rod of maximize (who doesn't, right?). That's an automatic 6 rolled on the die, +4 for level = 10 points of strength lost. So the opposing fighter with 22 strength got dropped to 12.

kamikasei
2007-03-26, 08:42 AM
Hmm, so at 1st level like you say, the Burning Hands or Magic Missile damage of a whopping 1d4+1 is worse? I don't buy it. Especially in a situation where you want to take them prisoner to extract information. If you burn em to death, they can't talk. And if you roll max of 7 points drained, the only 1st level NORMAL character still remaining at 13 STR would be a base 20 Half-Orc.

A first-level wizard facing a first-level fighter has a choice of Ray of Enfeeblement, requiring a ranged touch attack (bad idea) and a fortitude save (again, attacking the enemy's strengths)... or Sleep, requiring no attack and only a will throw, which is the fighter's weak point.

The latter has a much better chance of having an effect and the effect is to immediately totally disable the enemy. The former has the effect of maybe weighing down the enemy and making him slower, and perhaps denying him the use of a combat feat that he isn't really going to need in order to kill the wizard if he gets within range.

Shhalahr Windrider
2007-03-26, 08:46 AM
Hmm, so at 1st level like you say, the Burning Hands or Magic Missile damage of a whopping 1d4+1 is worse? I don't buy it.
I'm not saying it's worse. I'm saying it is in many ways comprable. Under the right circumstances, a magic missile kills. Those circumstances are:
Your opponent has been reduced to a number of hit points where the damage outright kills him or her. (Note that if your opponent is an undead or construct, this number will be positive.)
Your opponent is reduced to dying state by magic missile and is unable to stabilize.
There are a lot fewer areas for a lethal magic missile to go wrong than a ray of enfeeblement. The ray has at least two, possibly three, separate rolls it must pass before you have to worry about losing Power Attack. Whereas every opponent has hit points, only a few opponents have Power Attack or other Strength-dependent feats.

In any case, the real win button would be sleep or color spray, assuming your opponent doesn't have too many hit dice. A Power Attack-less barbarian is still dangerous. An unconcious barbarian isn't.


And if you roll max of 7 points drained, the only 1st level NORMAL character still remaining at 13 STR would be a base 20 Half-Orc.
Are we talking a first or second level wizard? A first level wizard maxes out at a -6 penalty. It's +1 per two caster levels. A first level wizard has only one caster level.

And that doesn't even cover the fact that the average penalty for a first-level casting of ray of enfeeblement that has hit its target is only 3.5 (discounting critical hits). You are very much worried about a perfect situation where everything has gone the way of the wizard.

Let's say you're going up against a human barbarian (Strength 15, Con 14, Dex 13, based off elite array). Your wizard has BAB +0 and, say Dex 13. Versus the barbarian's touch AC of 11, you have a 55% chance of hitting. Put another way, that's a 45% chance of missing and inflicting no penalty at all. (A basic calculation taking this miss chance into account, this time including criticals, shows you deal an average penalty of about 1.8 per casting.) And if it does miss, how many more rays can your 1st-level wizard have prepared?


A first-level wizard facing a first-level fighter has a choice of Ray of Enfeeblement, requiring a ranged touch attack (bad idea) and a fortitude save (again, attacking the enemy's strengths)...
Psst! Ray of enfeeblement (http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/35/sovelior_sage/spellsPtoR.html#ray-of-enfeeblement) has "Saving Throw: None."

[hr]And what's so bad about being able to meet prerequisites through magic anyway? Look hard enough and you can find a fair number of heroes that could only perform certain tasks when using some item of power or spell to enhance their natural abilities.

Lord Lorac Silvanos
2007-03-26, 08:52 AM
...this time including criticals...

Criticals? :smallconfused:

You cannot crit with a RoE.

kamikasei
2007-03-26, 08:54 AM
Psst! Ray of enfeeblement (http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/35/sovelior_sage/spellsPtoR.html#ray-of-enfeeblement) has "Saving Throw: None."

Whoops! How on earth did I miss that?

headwarpage
2007-03-26, 08:54 AM
Just so you know, this issue did not come up in the context of 1st level play. It came up with an 8th level wizard who owns a lesser rod of maximize (who doesn't, right?). That's an automatic 6 rolled on the die, +4 for level = 10 points of strength lost. So the opposing fighter with 22 strength got dropped to 12.

Yes, it's absolutely a valid tactic and a useful spell. But by 8th level, a wizard has a fair number of effective tactics - ray of enfeeblement is just one of them, and is probably roughly equal in power to many of the others. I don't think anybody's saying ray of enfeeblement isn't a good spell, it's just not a win button, and certainly not from level 1.

Shhalahr Windrider
2007-03-26, 08:55 AM
You cannot crit with a RoE.
You can generally crit with rays...

Doesn't work with penalties only straight damage?

Lord Lorac Silvanos
2007-03-26, 09:02 AM
Doesn't work with penalties only straight damage?

Damage and Energy Drain, not penalties.

Shhalahr Windrider
2007-03-26, 09:19 AM
Damage and Energy Drain, not penalties.
Not sure where to find the details on that. Source?

kamikasei
2007-03-26, 09:24 AM
Not sure where to find the details on that. Source?

This (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/spellDescriptions.htm#effect)

If a ray spell deals damage, you can score a critical hit (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/actionsInCombat.htm#criticalHits) just as if it were a weapon. A ray spell threatens a critical hit on a natural roll of 20 and deals double damage on a successful critical hit.
...can reasonably be interpreted as including both hit point and ability damage, but not ability penalties; but I don't see anything about Energy Drain.

edit: Searching...
First case (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm):

Some spells or abilities impose an effective ability score reduction, which is different from ability score loss. Any such reduction disappears at the end of the spell’s or ability’s duration, and the ability score immediately returns to its former value.
...
If an attack that causes ability damage scores a critical hit (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/actionsInCombat.htm#criticalHits), it deals twice the indicated amount of damage (if the damage is expressed as a die range, roll two dice).
...
If an attack that causes ability drain scores a critical hit (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/actionsInCombat.htm#criticalHits), it drains twice the indicated amount (if the damage is expressed as a die range, roll two dice).

Ah, here (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#energyDrainAndNegativeLevels) we are:

If an attack that includes an energy drain scores a critical hit (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/actionsInCombat.htm#criticalHits), it drains twice the given amount.

So anything that has to be healed away by time or spells, in general, gets to be multiplied by a critical, while temporary penalties from spells with a duration do not.

Lord Lorac Silvanos
2007-03-26, 09:25 AM
Not sure where to find the details on that. Source?

Sorry, I assumed you would take my word for it. :smalltongue:

Complete Arcane, page 86.

AtomicKitKat
2007-03-26, 09:28 AM
Not sure where to find the details on that. Source?

Start of the "Feats" section in Complete Arcane. Under "Criticals with spells", I think.

ken-do-nim
2007-03-26, 09:29 AM
Yes, it's absolutely a valid tactic and a useful spell. But by 8th level, a wizard has a fair number of effective tactics - ray of enfeeblement is just one of them, and is probably roughly equal in power to many of the others. I don't think anybody's saying ray of enfeeblement isn't a good spell, it's just not a win button, and certainly not from level 1.

It certainly was a win button in this case, with the minimal expenditure of a 1st level spell (pearl of powers make 1st level spells inexhaustible) and 1 out of 3 uses of the rod.

Shhalahr Windrider
2007-03-26, 09:32 AM
Sorry, I assumed you would take my word for it. :smalltongue:
Well, I would, but then I have to justify it to my players, and they might not be so trusting... :smallwink:


Complete Arcane, page 86.
Ah. I checked under the description of "Weapon-like Spells" in the Feats section.

And the PHB isn't particularly clear on the issue... but that's another issue for another day.


It certainly was a win button in this case...
An 8th-level fighter with a 12 Strength may be crippled, but it's certainly not defeated. Especially if said fighter has friends to help pick up the slack.


...with the minimal expenditure of a 1st level spell (pearl of powers make 1st level spells inexhaustible) and 1 out of 3 uses of the rod.
Them pearls ain't exactly cheap. You still need one whole pearl for each spell recovered. And I assume you want to keep a few other 1st level spells available as options.

Even if your wizard has an über-cache of pearls of power and doesn't mind over-preparing ray of enfeeblement, the rod will certainly run out before the spells do. It's only three times per day. And you might actually want to use the rod on a few of the higher-level spells that cannot be otherwise maximized.

It's still a pretty expensive proposition.

Lord Lorac Silvanos
2007-03-26, 09:42 AM
Well, I would, but then I have to justify it to my players, and they might not be so trusting... :smallwink:


Your players should learn to trust me then. :smalltongue:

headwarpage
2007-03-26, 09:46 AM
It certainly was a win button in this case, with the minimal expenditure of a 1st level spell (pearl of powers make 1st level spells inexhaustible) and 1 out of 3 uses of the rod.

Yes, but it's one of many win buttons available to the wizard. I agree that the expenditure of resources is minimal, although you have to account for the portion of the wizard's wealth that is sunk into the rod that allows him to do this. But at the same level, the wizard could also have cast any number of spells targeting the fighter's Will save, probably with a high enough DC that the fighter failing would have been at least as likely as the wizard hitting with the touch attack. And by using something like hold person, he takes the fighter completely out of the fight, instead of leaving him crippled but still needing to be accounted for.

Again, I'm not saying it isn't a nice spell, because it is. But there are other things that a wizard of any given level can do that have at least an equal effect, so it's probably more a case of wizards in general being very powerful than one particular spell being overpowered.

ken-do-nim
2007-03-26, 10:10 AM
Them pearls ain't exactly cheap. You still need one whole pearl for each spell recovered. And I assume you want to keep a few other 1st level spells available as options.


1st level pearls of power cost 1000 gp each. Plus you find tons of them in treasure hordes. I know many DMs make arbitrary rulings such as you can only use any one pearl of power 1/day, but with just the RAW your wizard has no excuse not to grab at least a half-dozen 1st level ones and stick his tongue out at the sorcerers.

Shhalahr Windrider
2007-03-26, 10:27 AM
1st level pearls of power cost 1000 gp each.
And that represents about 4% of an 8th-level wizard's total wealth. Get three of them, and you've taken away over a tenth of your wealth.

And don't forget you want to get a few defensive items, some wands, some scrolls and potions, a headband of intellect, maybe even a periapt of health to help out with your low hit die, and, oh yeah, let's not forget the cost of scribing new spells into your spellbook. I'd be surprised if you even have that 10% wealth left-over after all that.*

Oh, yeah, and where are you getting it when you go shopping? You need a town with at least 2,000 people living in it to pick one up.


Plus you find tons of them in treasure hordes.
Only if your DM purposely places a ton of them in treasure hordes.

You only have a 1% chance of generating 1st-level pearl of power in any given random "Minor Wondrous Item" roll, and you have to have something indicate you get a Minor Wondrous item befor you even have that chance. Oh, yeah, and that's based off of SRD-available items only. The chances go down if you use a more comprehensive table that allows for items from splat-books.

As for specifically-placed wealth, I shouldn't expect to see those puppies in the hands of many non-spellcasters, so you have to make an allowance for how common those are. And also realize that NPCs have a much smaller gear allowance than PCs, and so are less able to afford them. A 1st-level pearl of power represents about 11% of an 8th-level NPC gear value, compared to the 4% of an equal-level PC's wealth.

[hr]Edit
* Ah, yes, I just realized I forgot to factor in the cost of the lesser maximize metamagic rod in that bit. That costs [b]over half[/i] of and 8th-level wizard's expected wealth. Leaving even less room for all that other important stuff.

And I believe most DMs prefer to keep their players from spending over half of their wealth on a single item. After all, wealth by level represents a net total accumulation over time, not a single shopping spree.

Stephen_E
2007-03-26, 10:47 AM
On the associated point of using items to allow you to qualify for a feat. - I put on my belt of Giant Strength when I get out of bed. I spend most of the day learning the Power Attack feat. I do other stuff and then go to bed, taking off my belt when I do so. Rinse and repeat next day until feat learnt (this is assuming I'm not playing one of my more paranoid PC's, in which case I sleep, have sex and possibly bath with it on). Why should the feat be significantly harder to learn than if I had the necessary str without the belt?

Stephen

ken-do-nim
2007-03-26, 10:56 AM
On the associated point of using items to allow you to qualify for a feat. - I put on my belt of Giant Strength when I get out of bed. I spend most of the day learning the Power Attack feat. I do other stuff and then go to bed, taking off my belt when I do so. Rinse and repeat next day until feat learnt (this is assuming I'm not playing one of my more paranoid PC's, in which case I sleep, have sex and possibly bath with it on). Why should the feat be significantly harder to learn than if I had the necessary str without the belt?

Stephen

The silent majority of us do not have a problem with allowing one to qualify for feats using magic items. From the DM's point of view, it just means that when he whips that beholder out, not only does the player lose his items but he loses his feats too.

Zherog
2007-03-26, 11:19 AM
It certainly was a win button in this case, with the minimal expenditure of a 1st level spell (pearl of powers make 1st level spells inexhaustible) and 1 out of 3 uses of the rod.

And the wizard still needed to roll his to-hit roll; if he misses, the spell is wasted. An 8th level wizard has a BAB of +4; what's his Dex mod? +2, maybe +3? So a total of +7 to-hit. Now, if the enemy is engaged in melee combat, that's a -4 to the attack roll. If the enemy has cover from the person he's engaged in melee combat with, that's +4 to his AC. Just the first of those makes hitting the target's touch AC a tricky situation.

Here's some other stuff that wizard could've done to the fighter-type dude instead:

glitterdust - (2nd level spell) This has a longer range than RoE (medium vs close range) and blinds the target (-2 to AC, loses Dex to AC (making him vulenerable to sneak attack unless he has uncanny dodge), moves at half speed, and all opponents are considered to have concealment (50% miss chance). It's a Will save, so it's better in this case than using the blindness/deafness spell.

Tasha's hideous laughter - (2nd level spell) Another Will save, so again the fighter type is pretty screwed. The creature drops prone (-4 to AC vs melee attacks), and can take no actions for the duration of the spell.

Hypnotic pattern - (2nd level) Again, medium range so we can stand further away; we can use that lesser rod of maximize to ensure the fighter type is affected, and it's a Will save. In fact, with the Maximize effect, we can handle a total of 16 HD of creatures - so not only can we take out this guy, we can possibly get some of his buddies too. Anybody affected is fascinated for the duration (which is concentration plus 2 rounds, so you can keep it up for a long-ass time). Fascinated creatures take no actions, and suffer a -4 to Spot and Listen. Obvious threathening acts allow another save, but the rogue can simply sneak up and get off a killer sneak attack while you concentrate.

Scorching ray - (2nd level) You like rays, we'll use 'em for dealing an assload of damage. At 8th level we get two rays, each dealing 4d6 points of fire damage. We can maximize it, though, so we can deal a total of 48 points of fire damage. While not utterly spectacular, it's a significant chunk of damage - in fact, it's enough that your own fighter or rogue can probably take this guy down in one round now.

Reduce person - (1st level) Most people use this as a buff spell for casters and archers, but it can be used against an enemy as well. The target gains a +2 to Dex, but suffers a -2 to Strength. In addition, going from Medium to Small reduces your carrying capacity, and makes you more susceptable to trip, disarm, and grapple attacks.

Grease - (1st level) It's a Reflex save, something else all those fighter-types are bad at. You also need to make a Balance check; if you fail, you lose your Dex bonus to AC. Hello sneak attack from the party rogue (who is likely to make the Balance check, and therefore have no problems moving through the area)

Charm person - (1st level) It's best to get this one off before combat, but even used in combat there's a good chance it'll work since it's a Will save. Why fight against the fighter-type when you can just make him your friend and fight with him?

Deep slumber - (3rd level) Sure, sleep is no longer effective; but this spell is. Nighty night, Mr. Fighter-type. Hope you don't mind my party's rogue performing a coup de grace on you while you sleep.

Hold person - (3rd level) It's a Will save, but at least our target gets to fail every round. Once he fails, he's essentially dead since he's helpless. The rogue can sneak attack, or your party fighter can make a full Power Attack coup de grace against him.

Slow - (3rd level) Again, it's a Will save. And we can affect multiple targets, too, not just the fighter type. Penalties to attack rolls, AC, and Reflex saves, and only able to take a single move or standard action. Yay.

Stinking cloud - (3rd level) This one's a Fort save, so maybe our fighter will make it this time. Failure means he's nauseated for as long as he's in the cloud and 1d4+1 rounds afterwards. But hey - we can use our rod on that, so we can guarantee it'll last for 5 rounds after the fighter-type leaves the cloud. A nauseated creature can't do jack except take a single move action. No attacks; no spell casting; no concentrating on existing spells. Just barfing. Oh - and it's a medium range spell, so you can be 180 feet away when you cast it at 8th level.

Suggestion - (3rd level) Another Will save, so our fighter type is going to continue to have problems. You can simply just remove him from the fight. "I suggest you go over to the corner and remove all your gear." Done. Deal with everybody else, then come back to deal with the nekkid fighter when everything else is taken care of.

That's core only. Of course, there's even better spells once you start poking around in the PHB2 and the Complete books. And I didn't even look at the 4th level spells - I only looked for spells of 3rd or less because of our rod (even though I only used it a few times).

And if we're going for the real cheese, we can crack out power word: pain from Races of the Dragon. But, really, that spell is best left ignored - it's all kinds of broken.

***

Basically, though, you're really discounting the necessity to make the ranged touch attack. Touch AC is usually really low, but given the wizard's sucky BAB and other factors (in melee, soft cover), it's still not a given that the ray hits.

the_tick_rules
2007-03-26, 12:38 PM
so then everyone should use int drain on wizards.

ken-do-nim
2007-03-26, 12:46 PM
Basically, though, you're really discounting the necessity to make the ranged touch attack. Touch AC is usually really low, but given the wizard's sucky BAB and other factors (in melee, soft cover), it's still not a given that the ray hits.

True. I guess when it works, it makes everything look so simple. "I'm a wizard, therefore I win" kinda thing.

I still want those ranges for ray spells. Here's what I can recall of that other post: 40' short/160' medium/x long but who cares because there aren't many long-range ray spells. Just need to make that touch ac that much harder.

marjan
2007-03-26, 12:53 PM
so then everyone should use int drain on wizards.

That is good strategy if you have access to it.

headwarpage
2007-03-26, 01:04 PM
so then everyone should use int drain on wizards.

A good strategy. Str damage also works, though, and is much more accessible. Ray of enfeeblement (possibly maximized/empowered) + ray of exhaustion knocks the average wizard to 0 Str. Quicken the ray of enfeeblement and you can do it in one round. You still have to hit your touch attacks, though.


True. I guess when it works, it makes everything look so simple. "I'm a wizard, therefore I win" kinda thing.

Yeah, that happens. But it can happen with any class, really. If the barbarian wins initiative and one-shots the enemy wizard, he's going to look pretty effective too. Most characters have some sort of an 'I win' trick that they're just waiting to pull off. It's just that the wizard can pull them off in more situations than most classes, especially if he knows what sort of situation to prepare for.

Awetugiw
2007-03-26, 01:16 PM
so then everyone should use int drain on wizards.


Nah. On wizards (or sorcerers) you simply use Feeblemind. The -4 on the save for arcane casters hurts.

AtomicKitKat
2007-03-26, 10:07 PM
Clerics(and probably Druids) are the worst to disable. The nearest thing to Feeblemind is Mind Fog, which grants a Will save, which naturally, is the strongest save for all spellcasters(should really be Conjuration and Fortitude, IMO, but that's also their strong save. At least Constitution is generally a secondary/tertiary stat for them, so their Fortitude save should be lower.). Additionally, it only affects you upon first casting. Staying in it after you've saved requires no further checks.

Edit:


so then everyone should use int drain on wizards.

You can Feeblemind(which is all kinds of broken in a battle of spellcasters), or you can paralyse them by taking away Strength, which is usually a dump stat for them anyways. Can you be paralysed from exhaustion(Enfeebling for 2, plus 6 for exhaustion, or Enfeeble for 6, plus 2 for Fatigue=0 Strength on a Small Wizard) though?:smallconfused:

Attacking a target's weakest(dump) ability score(preferrably with a spell attacking their weakest save) is generally a good tactic anyway.

Kantolin
2007-03-26, 10:55 PM
On wizards (or sorcerers) you simply use Feeblemind. The -4 on the save for arcane casters hurts.

Let me see... level 10 wizard has a +3 to their fort save, and a +7 to their will save.

Feeblemind is a will save with a -4 penalty, thus placing it at exactly the same as a fort save.

So go with baleful polymorph. ^_^ Since that way, in addition to disabling the wizard, you get a free pet pheasant!

...or lunch.

To be fair, the spellcaster is likely to boost constitution over wisdom, but hey.

StarWarz2
2007-03-27, 07:57 AM
Can you be paralysed from exhaustion(Enfeebling for 2, plus 6 for exhaustion, or Enfeeble for 6, plus 2 for Fatigue=0 Strength on a Small Wizard) though?:smallconfused:

Any penalty/damage that reduces strength to 0 immobilizes the target. Regardless of HOW it happened. RoE + STR Damage poison + fatigue = nasty.

That gives me a nasty idea for my group. :smallbiggrin:

Thanks!

Attacking a target's weakest(dump) ability score(preferrably with a spell attacking their weakest save) is generally a good tactic anyway.

And it usually sucks for the players when you use their tactics back on them.

its_all_ogre
2007-03-27, 08:44 AM
my recent dragon was level1 sorcerer and had RoE and mage armour.
i loved the brb players face when they lost 6 str! they still had a net gain of 2 for most of fight due to bulls str and rage, but still!
used RoE on whole party in the end!