Talk:Traver's Tongue Serpent (3.5e Spell)

Balance

Isn't it a little odd to have a spell which casts another, higher-level, spell once per round? I guess it's not that great a spell, but it's still not terrible. --Foxwarrior 00:54, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Maybe but not only is poison not all that great of a spell, but the snake also does have to successfully bite you in order for you to even have to make a save. It may not be much, but it's adding another variable to it that makes it a bit weaker. That may be a fair criticism, however; I'm not really sure, but I would probably say that poison isn't deserving of a level 4 spell slot. - TG Cid 02:24, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Multi-round con damage attacks are pretty awesome to begin with at this level, and the additional benefits of "can't be flanked" or "entangled by your own tongue" aren't too bad either. It might work to instead just give the snake the stats of a SRD:Medium Viper, but with your BAB and maybe a slight boost to the poison save DC. That's less regular damage and less con damage, but still a quite solid debuff spell. - Tarkisflux ^Talk 22:40, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

That may work fine for casting it on certain creatures, but my reasoning for the spell in its current form was partially to make it so that the viper would be sized appropriately for the creature affected, which making it specifically Medium would probably detract from. - TG Cid (talk) 19:12, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

In looking back at this again, I don't think the Med Viper was a good suggestion. The spell already gives it a reach and a BAB and it doesn't have separate hit points or AC, so there's not much to borrow from the creature other than the damage and poison strength. Which I do sort of think appropriate. The bite damage can afford a drop to that of one or sizes smaller than the base creature though, since it's not a medium sized head doing the biting and it carries poison and you do it as a swift action. So 1d4 or 1d6 when cast on a medium creature. And the poison damage needs to come down and the DC needs to be clarified, because repeated exposures to 1d10 con at 5th level is unpleasant. Again either 1d4 or 1d6 Con damage, with a Fort against the same DC as the spell. Which is a significant drop in offense, but since the spell also either entangles / silences a target or prevents them from being flanked it doesn't seem like a large enough drop to take it out of being a 3. - Tarkisflux ^Talk 19:51, 3 November 2012 (UTC)