For a spell specifically designed to kill vampires, it's a very specialized spell that actually doesn't even hurt all undead unlike what the description says. I'd say raise it to 50 dmg per attack instead of 25. I could just use a fire spell for very little difference in magic cost and get a more powerful attack.

Just my 2 cents.

you basically contradicted yourself..it says it's specific to kill vampires only..not all undead.

Sometimes a spell is more suited to a role than to the overall game. In this case, a Vampire Hunter would use this, where other arcane practitioners would use a generic fire spell or something else.

Hopefully the spell does more damage to Vampires than the same level fire spell does to Undead. I have not used it so I don't know about that.

I use it cause I like the special effects.

Your version of the game must be broken then, because I have it on right now. "Ball of sunlight that does 25 points of damage to undead" in the spell description. Yet draugr say they resist it. Draugrs are not undead now?

They both do 25 damage actually, firebolt and sun fire both are apprentice level spells according to the wiki firebolt costs 41 magicka and sun fire costs 24. Which I have no idea where those numbers are from but the stats in my game with perks mind you say it's 25 damage for Sun fire for 14 magicka and 52 damage for firebolt for 12 magicka. I'm assuming the extra damage is from the necromage perk, me being a vampire, the fire boosting perks also and I heard aspect of terror makes fire spells do more damage. But my numbers are way off compared to the wiki's making regular fire seem way more potent.

the weird part is the spell costs as well, i have reduction on destruction spells but not restoration, so why they are both lower than they are supposed to be. No equipment with a destruction or restoration reduction either, only perks.