|
Lyrie Akenja, the wizard hired by Nualia that you encounter in Thistletop, uses a tactic that by the rules isn't possible:
Lyrie knows she's outclassed in most fights, and prefers to avoid combat when alone if possible. If forced into combat, she first casts mirror image, then focuses most of her spells on heavily armored characters, casting shatter on a weapon and ray of enfeeblement in an attempt to get them to suffer for wearing such heavy armor. She relies heavily on her wand of magic missile in combat.
Emphasis mine. Presumably she does this so heavily armored opponents go into heavy load territory and start to take heavier penalties. However, ray of enfeeblement causes a Strength penalty to the target, and according to the glossary in the Core Rulebook:
Strength: Damage to your Strength score causes you to take penalties on Strength-based skill checks, melee attack rolls, and weapon damage rolls (if they rely on Strength). The penalty also applies to your Combat Maneuver Bonus (if you are Small or larger) and your Combat Maneuver Defense.
Strength damage and penalties don't affect carrying capacity. However, Strength drain does.
Considering she's outnumbered four-to-one, I didn't bother with that. Instead I had her attack, and then when they didn't immediately bolt she cast Invisibility and tried to escape. At which point she got grappled by the halfling bard/cleric. Yeah. Things... got interesting after that, especially as they decided to subdue her. ;)
Also consider that encumbrance penalties don't stack with armor penalties. It sounds like a good idea, but the mechanics don't back it up.
Her tactics are unchanged from the original 3.5 version. In 3.5 ability damage did temporarily lower a character's ability score.
This might be another example of a significant tactics implication to a subtle change to the ruleset. There are several of them in the ROTL:AE. (Another is that the barghest's tactics mention use of its rage ability-- which barghests had in 3.5 but do not in PF.) Otheres include use of spells that were on a class list in 3.5 but are not in PF. (e.g. Justice Ironbriar.)
[Honestly, I still use the 3.5 rule for ability damage in my PF game. I think it is much easier to use and makes more sense.]
My interpretation (which is what I ran with when this question came up during my players' encounter with Lyrie) is that Ray of Enfeeblement does actually reduce the target's Strength score.
A coruscating ray springs from your hand. You must succeed on a ranged touch attack to strike a target. The subject takes a penalty to Strength equal to 1d6+1 per two caster levels (maximum 1d6+5). The subject's Strength score cannot drop below 1. A successful Fortitude save reduces this penalty by half. This penalty does not stack with itself. Apply the highest penalty instead.
The spell description does not actually mention ability damage or drain, it specifies that it is a penalty directly to the ability score. Furthermore, that penalty has a duration (1 round/level) which is not the case with ability damage or drain.
[Honestly, I still use the 3.5 rule for ability damage in my PF game. I think it is much easier to use and makes more sense.]
I both agree and disagree. I think the old rule was definitely easier to remember but I do think the new way makes more sense. With the new rule, a fighter with 16 Strength is not affected more than a character with 17 Strength by taking a single point of Strength damage. It's more balanced that they both need to take 2 points of Strength damage before they take a -1 penalty, IMO.
CrazyGnomes is correct--the only thing that doesn't affect encumbrance is ability damage. Drain and penalties (and the even more confusing "decrease" from blasphemy) all do.