Talk:Minute Meteors (3.5e Spell)

Ratings

	Leziad opposes this article and rated it 0 of 4.
	At 7th level, when you get it you get to make a ranged touch attack for 7d6 damage. Then reflex vs 7d6 damage. All of that seven times. Even if the damage does not stack between the impact and explosion, that still 49d6 potential damage at level 7. I think it a little much myself.

	Eiji-kun opposes this article and rated it 0 of 4.
	I'm not too keen on attack action uncapped fireball, 5 ft radius or not, because attack action uncapped fireball. Oh and make an easy touch to deny save. And attack action uncapped fireball. And for many rounds for one spell at only level four. And did I mention the attack action uncapped fireball???

	Tarkisflux likes this article and rated it 3 of 4.
	It's a nice blasting spell that might even keep its caster busy for the whole encounter.

	Undead_Knave opposes this article and rated it 0 of 4.
	This is ridiculous, as LD and Eiji have said.

Why attack action?

What it says on the tin. I'm not sure why you want clerics with the hellfire domain tossing multiple fireballs a round for the whole of a combat. So, why for attack action instead of standard? - Tarkisflux 20:24, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

The idea was that it's the core of the Fire Mage class rolled up into a spell. Making it a standard action makes it not much better than a level 3 spell, in my opinion, since fireball in and of itself is good for little more than a 2 if not a 1. I just think this offers more potential while not necessarily imposing the same limitations as the basic fireball. - TG Cid 20:48, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

I'm with you on fireball being not great in 3e and working as a lower level spell. I'm just not with you on giving multiple rounds of fireballs and multiple balls per round from one casting of a 4th level spell. It just seems to me like your getting too much for a 4th. 7 rounds of touch-attack-for-no-save enlarged fireballs from a single casting is already decent, as is 2 or 3 (level 11 with divine power) in a round because of the focus fire options and early damage potential. I guess I'm just concerned about doing both and don't see why it's warranted at this spell level, since it looks like it out performs even the good 4th level spells. - Tarkisflux 21:10, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Done, as discussed on IRC. - TG Cid 21:46, 13 April 2011 (UTC)

Changes to the Spell

Ten years on, I can see why this might be extreme and propose the following changes:

1. Could change to a standard action since this is still giving you a weaker fireball every turn, trading the big aoe damage for some assured damage against a single target.

2. Explicitly state that the target of a successful touch attack does not take damage from the explosion, so you can't have some funky "take damage twice" stacking. - TG Cid (talk) 11:55, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

Both together would be a good idea IMO. --Ghostwheel (talk) 12:27, 24 April 2021 (UTC)

I agree with Ghostwheel on this subject. --Leziad (talk) 21:27, 26 April 2021 (UTC)