Talk:Sasha's Searing Light (3.5e Spell)

Ratings

	Leziad opposes this article and rated it 0 of 4.
	What Eiji said. Low level spells should not be uncapped.

Eiji-kun opposes this article and rated it 0 of 4.

The spell itself is a fine idea, but uncapped 1st level 1:1 scaling spells make a plushie sad. The metamagic opportunities are many, and it removes the need for higher level single target damage spells. Psionics goes further behind too, as casters get free augmentation, effectively. I'm all for raising caps, and even uncapping, but only after a certain point. Let the low-levels be low level. EDIT: After many many many examples of it in action, and the exact abuses I had defined, I move this to an oppose and use it as a "shining" example of why uncapped spells for the lower level spells is a terrible idea.

Tarkisflux likes this article and rated it 3 of 4.

Searing light was a terrible 3rd level spell, even for the cleric. Boosting the damage and dropping the level resolves that rather nicely. It's not much better than a crossbow at 1st level (which is a bit sad), and it somehow made it onto the wizard and druid lists (which is more sad), but the range and damage scaling make it compare well with other VH options at the same spell level, which I like.

Power Level

While I am a fan of uncapped spells, I specifically am a fan of uncapped high level spells. The uncapped growth of thus at 1st level displeases me. -- Eiji-kun 09:24, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Capping low-level spells seems the same as imposing an HD limit on, say, color spray (i.e. it's kind of silly). It's already about the same power level as a Tome warlock's eldritch blast (granted, with a bit better range) but it's not useable at will either. Imposing a damage cap is specifically what I personally would want to avoid so as to not make the spell completely obsolete at a higher level. - TG Cid 14:42, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

I'm pretty comfortable with low level combat spells becoming obsolete as higher level spells come online actually, since they can be replaced with utility stuff and the slot isn't wasted even if a particular spell drops out of use. It's not like low level combat spells get cast outside of really long workdays anyway. It tends to work better in a setup where the caster has an at-will ability to fall back on though (even if that thing is combat), just in case they want to do a long workday. - Tarkisflux ^Talk 16:19, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

Truth is: I am pretty much on both sides on this issue. Capped spells are kind of a pain (which is why I love spells like Erad's Silent Killer, shh), although in this case, the spell is just too powerful for such a low-level spell (the ability to deal 1d10 untyped damage/level without even a save is simply too much for me). I guess my solution for these lines of spells would be to keep them scaling, but at a reduced rate so as not to make them equal to higher level spells (in this case, why would I cast a 3rd level spell if I could empower this beast?). As a rule of thumb, 1d6 damage/2 levels would set a pretty good standard, I guess. It's definitely not the most powerful spell of your arsenal, but it's nothing to laugh at neither, and leaves you an option the get rid of the underlings without resorting to higher-level spells or just waiting for your fighter, ranger and the like to do the job for you. Also, the range is pretty high... -HarrowedMind 19:34, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

+1 to that Harrowed. The thing which bothers me is that people forget the metamagic stacking one can do to a spell, which is harder to pull off the higher level it is. I remain dissplushie. -- Eiji-kun 04:57, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Metamagic Stacking (for Eiji)

Ok, I admit I did not consider metamagic stacking with this, but I can't come up with any that really bother me off hand. And since it was brought up here, it seems as good a place as any other to get it out. So Eiji, what sort of stacking were you specifically concerned about? For purposes of this discussion, we should probably ignore the bullshit sudden line of feats and weird metamagic variants. - Tarkisflux ^Talk 05:25, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

Alright then. Having built many a metamagic build before, I can assure it's possible to load up some absurd damages with low level spells already, but they usually require builds and feats built for them to keep costs down. After all you want to start popping metamagic both as soon as possible and later, as much as possible. While there's all sorts of things you can do, one combo off to top of my hand only involves two feats for minimal investment (well, three, pre-req of any other metamagic). Twin and Repeat. Or Twin and Quicken. Either way.

The result of that, without any reducers and on this spell, is a 9th level spell which deals between 80d6 to 80d10 damage with a 1st level spell (20th lvl caster), since it goes off four times. But say he had Arcane Thesis, since this is a great spell to focus metamagic might on. Now its only a 7th level spell, and he can slap on a (now +2) metamagic Maximize on top for a keen 480 to 800 damage.

This was with only minor optimization. I think, for any metamagic focused build, 4 feats going to the existance of uber blasting is a reasonable expectation. If you broke out with all the optimization, well...

Let's say I'm sitting on a theoretical build which could kill most anything, limited by the fact he's using a 4th level spell. And I could technically squeeze out a little more damage if I focused on Magic Missile (1st level) over Orb of Force. And that's with the damage limitations of magic missile. This... this is a different level. -- Eiji-kun 05:42, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

(EDIT: And actually, since it's a Ray, use Split Ray at a cheap +2. Let's see... Empowered Split Ray Twin is 9th level, no reducers, for 120d6 to 120d10 all in one round instead of 2.) -- Eiji-kun 05:49, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

I feel as though a 1st level spell remaining relevant at high levels through the use of metamagic was exactly the point of metamagic in the first place. Without either a specific build to spam metamagic or all of those additional levels into the spell, it's still a 1st level spell, and if it cannot have an effect similar to an actual 9th level spell when metamagicked to such a degree, I probably wouldn't consider it worth much in the first place, given that one of the key problems D&D has is how absolutely useless 90% of your spells become as you gain levels. Yet now that a spell can actually compete (when metamagicked specifically, if it was just competitive on the merit of its scaling alone it would be a different issue), we want to cut it down. Suffice to say I am not in agreement with the opposers here. - TG Cid (talk) 13:25, 9 August 2014 (UTC)