Clerical spell Harm, too powerful?

[IceBear]

Yes, messing with the core rules requires a price, but if the DM AND the players are willing to pay it, what does it matter to YOU? In this case, I've seen pretty much every designer saying it was broken - and Dungeon magazine - so I doubt that tampering with it with have as high a price as some other things.

I suggested to my players a long time ago that harm could lead to some particularly nasty conclusions - and not just used against them, but for the overall excitement of the game. We discussed it and they were all rather shocked that there was no Save. Thus, we all agreed - especially the cleric player - to give it a save.

It's still nothing to sneeze at, if it hits a 100+ hp creature, it will (in my case) eithe reduce them to 1-4hp or 50+ hitpoints AND require a save vs massive damage or die. Not bad in my books at all.

IceBear

 

[Stalker0]

I swear, there's two things about harm threads that seem to always happen

1) I see people posting that I've never seen before

2) You get more fights than prime time boxing


Personally, I think harm should get a save. Argue it how you want.

Also, I used to be off the mind set that a save for harm should do a set damage like xd6+y, but I've changed my mind. It would be silly that harm drops you to 1d4 if you pass,and could potentially kill you if you succed

SO I go with the half hps thing.

 

[FlimFlam]

I don't think Harm will be erratted at all, as it seems to be a sacred cow.

I do however think they may give alternate rules for it.

 

[Bonedagger]

Harm

In case anybody wanted some inspiration.

 

[Lucius Foxhound]

Whoa... Bonedagger.. that's cool how you made all the harms light up in red for the entire thread. How'd you do that, eh?

Rules for Harm rule.

 

[maddman75]

Actually, if you change Harm you don't need to change heal. After all, all it says is 'Against undead, Heal acts like Harm' .

And weak DMs are those that are afraid to experiement with the rules. I've got a few house rules. Harm is nerfed, no favored classes (all races MC as if human), no restriction on monks or pallys, druid's stupid 'oath' is gone, and I have my own method of generating ability scores. My game's running just fine. And its a fair bit fewer than the house rules I had under 2e, I guarantee!

As for players making up their own prestige classes, I'd much rather have that than picking them out of a book! Of course I'd work with the player on abilities and such, but a player making their own class I rather like .

 

[IceBear]

Actually, if you change Harm you don't need to change heal. After all, all it says is 'Against undead, Heal acts like Harm' .

Got me there!

IceBear

 

[Psion]

Re: Re

Our house rule is as follows: Will save. If successful, you only lose half your hit points.

That is what I am doing. All these "save to reduce the damage to Xd8+level" variants make the spell weaker than slay living. It needs to be more powerful that slay living.

Save for half still and the will save still helps the spell remain potent in its original competancy -- taking down big creatures. A creature with lots of hit points (i.e., a creature that you would want to use this spell on) will most likely have a pretty significant fortitude save.

 

[FlimFlam]

And weak DMs are those that are afraid to experiement with the rules.

The same could be said about DMs who change the rules to suit their needs rather than thinking of viable ways within the rules to counter them.

 

[Psion]

See, I wouldn't. I play 3E D&D. You should try it sometime. Like I've always said, if you can't handle Harm, you need to read the DMG more.

House rules are for the weak.

Oooh, early era Gygaxism updated to 3e!