Sunbeam clarification

[eleclipse]

So the spell says:

"Each creature in the beam is blinded and takes 4d6 points of damage. Any creatures to which sunlight is harmful or unnatural take double damage. A successful Reflex save negates the blindness and reduces the damage by half.

An undead creature caught within the beam takes 1d6 points of damage per caster level (maximum 20d6), or half damage if a Reflex save is successful. In addition, the beam results in the destruction of any undead creature specifically harmed by bright light if it fails its save."

The question is, can an undead be blinded by this or not?

It's not clear if the second part is saying "if the subject is udead don't consider the above and do this" or "if he's an undead to the first part and ALSO the second one"

Thanks in advance for any help

[Majuba]

Interesting.

It's fairly clear that you use the second paragraph for undead instead of the first. It wouldn't make sense to do damage, blind, then do damage again.

Also, Undead are usually immune to affects that blind, because they are usually Fortitude saves (and don't affect objects). So it makes sense for them to get a different result. Although Constructs, also immune to Fort saves that don't affect objects, *can* be blinded by Sunbeam.

*shrug* the 13d6-20d6 should be enough generally.

[Claxon]

I think yes. Undead, would take 1d6 per caster level in damage. They would make a reflex save to half the damage. If they succeed they take the damage and nothing else. If, they fail the save they are blinded, per the earlier text of the spell. If the undead has a weakness to sunlight, they are instead destroyed by Sunbeam.

The specific portion of the spell about undead doesn't invalidate the earlier portions, it only tells you what changes specifically for undead. Which in this case is how the damage changes and that if they have a weakness to sunlight will (potentially) destroy them.

[anthonydido]

Undead aren't specifically immune to blindness and it's not a Fortitude save so I would think they could be blinded by it.

The way I read it is that the first paragraph explains how the spell generally works and the second is alterations to that for undead. I could see it interpreted as separate functions of the spell though.

[Majuba]

I see it as separate functions:

Creatures in General: What it does, what it does if you fail the save.
Undead: What it does, what it can do if you fail the save.

I am having trouble thinking of an undead that "really should be blind" with a failed save, that wouldn't be destroyed...

[Vanykrye]

Majuba wrote:

I see it as separate functions:

Creatures in General: What it does, what it does if you fail the save.
Undead: What it does, what it can do if you fail the save.

I am having trouble thinking of an undead that "really should be blind" with a failed save, that wouldn't be destroyed...

Lich.

[Nothing]

I agree with Majuba that it was very likely intended to be separate functions, but as written undead fully qualify for both the first and second paragraph, including the 4d6 damage (whether they would have to make two separate Reflex saves or just one is unclear, though).

So one reasonable interpretation of the RAW would have a 12th level caster targeting a Vampire with the following effects:

First paragraph: Vampire is a creature harmed by light. It fails the Reflex save and takes 8d6 and is blinded.

Second paragraph: Vampire is an undead specifically harmed by light. It makes the second reflex save and takes an additional 12d6 / 2.

That's not the way I would run it, but I think that interpretation is supported by the RAW (as would both effects using a single reflex save to resolve both).