Talk:Elush's Eye-Blasting Explosion (3.5e Spell)

Just to point out that negating all special abilities (as well as sight) derived from the target's eyes with no save makes this spell the perfect beholder killer (pretty much all casters would rename it Beholder's Bane, I guess). And it's a second level spell... -HarrowedMind 21:12, 20 October 2011 (UTC)

It's touch-range, and shit-easy to remove. I'm not sure what the issue is. -MisterSinister 03:48, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

While a level 2 savetouch-orand-cause suck is potentially hardcore, I think it's a fine setup in this case since you're sacrificing range for a slightly increased likelihood of the spell affecting the target (as successful touch attacks are slightly more likely than a failed fort save). That just puts this near parity with your downgraded to level 2 cleric / wizard 2 blindness though. The part where they can't access their gaze related abilities is a straight power-up from the cleric / wizard version, and the fact that they can't actually fix that without level 5+ spells means it's not actually "shit-easy" to remove. For several levels after you first acquire this spell it's basically impossible as there is no counter to that portion of the spell available, and that's an additional and substantial straight boost over the reference spell. Then there's an (admittedly not impressive) pile of damage on top of it all.

So unless I'm missing something, that adds up to a pretty significant upgrade compared to reference without any increase in spell level to accomodate that boost. I would call that problematic. A touch attack blind that also disables gaze attacks until healed with a remove blindness I could see as a 2 still (though I would probably want to limit it to 2 eyes per application to limit complete ability shutdown potential), but the rest of it makes me want to increase the level by a couple and boost some of the damage to make it better fit. - Tarkisflux ^Talk 04:32, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

I would rather keep the level as it is. For all you beholder-lovers out there, I'm willing to nerf total ability shutdown in this regard, and I agree that it is harder to remove than I had first suspected. Nerfs incoming. - MisterSinister 22:17, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

If the players can use it, it's also available to the DM, right? So let's imagine this scenario; our brave adventurers are going on an adventure far into the wilderness, perhaps even searching for buried treasure or a magical macguffin in some deep dungeon, when an enemy uses this spell on them. Unfortunately, the party consists lacks a paladin and a cleric, the wizard making liberal use of this spell to shut down enemies. A single enemy now uses it on the party's [insert good melee class in here], and they fail the save. Now what? Does the whole adventure stop as the party packs up and journeys all the way back to town in order for a player not to have to sit out or be led like a cripple around? All because of a single spell available to any prepared caster when they hit level 3.... :-/ --Ghostwheel 09:50, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

@Ghost - Yes, that is exactly what they should do. Just like if they had been targetted by the SRD blindness from across the field and failed their save. The spell is missing a balance tag (and it should have one), but it's MS's work and pretty clearly aimed at being a wizard level spell, and that sort of thing is completely acceptable at this level there. Also it's a touch attack, not a save. The save is only for the damage.

@MS - I still think this is out of line. Assuming you agree that the SRD blindness is a level 2, you're asking me to accept that the following equation holds: Fort Negates Perm Blind + Medium Range = Perm Blind + Touch Attack + Melee Range + Ability Shutdown + Fort Half Target Damage + Ref Half Burst Damage + Caster Exlusion. I don't think it does. Without an explanation why those two sides actually balance each other I think something in this spell needs to give, and since you want acid damage and ability shut down and blindness I think the places to cut are permanency and maybe burst damage. Sacrificing burst damage leaves you able to retain a longer duration, and I could see a touch attack blind for caster level minutes + fort half acid damage balancing that equation. If you want the burst still I think you need to reduce the duration even further to rounds per level, though at that point a version closer to glitterdust that sprayed acid at all targets within a cone, blinding them and dealing 1d6 acid damage for caster level rounds and blocking a few gaze abilities all the while might make more sense. - Tarkisflux ^Talk 20:35, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

Bump. I've had this tagged with WC for a bit now, and would like to resolve it. - Tarkisflux ^Talk 23:20, 18 January 2012 (UTC)

And fixed, I hope. - MisterSinister 05:26, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

I have no strong objection to non-scaling token damage on top of blind and gaze shut down as a touch attack. It looks basically in line with blindness as far as I'm concerned, so as long as you agree that blindness was a decent level 2 in the first place I'm comfortable with how it stands. Pulling the WC. - Tarkisflux ^Talk 06:09, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Ratings

Aarnott likes this article and rated it 3 of 4.

I've never particularly liked the Blindness spell, mostly because healing it is a 3rd level spell. However, this spell certainly is less overpowered than Blindness (touch range) without being strictly worse. This spell would actually make it a bit more interesting for a caster to use since they would want to pick their targets carefully to also inflict a bit of damage to nearby enemies. Also, the visuals are somewhat amusing in a disturbed sort of way.