Clerical spell Harm, too powerful?

[IceBear]

Good point about Flesh to Stone - I haven't really looked at it much.

A decent cleric can cast Harm in melee without blinking an eye (especially since his Concentration is probably sufficient at that level to cast defensively).

One thing that I can think of is that Saving Throws tend to scale with power, so Flesh to Stone on a powerful monster will probably fail as it will probably make it's save while a touch attack - in most cases - will still succeed.

That's what Henry pointed out. In the past you had to hit the monster. There's a big difference between hitting an ancient red with your war hammer and making a touch attack to touch it in 3E. I also *think* in past editions, if you missed the attack roll you lost the spell anyway unlike now where you can try again. I could be wrong about that point.

Also, with Flesh to Stone, you're more or less out of the battle, but at the same time you're probably not going to get killed. With Harm, you'd better hope and pray that no one gets to go before you (or your allies) or you'll be dead. While it is true that you're alive after the harm takes effect, most PCs worth their salt will have a coordinated effort where everyone waits until harm is cast and then attack immediately after preventing the target from doing anything sans a contingency.

IceBear

 

[Isollae]

sorry Ice Bear, i miss read the entry on t-attack on page 125. thank you.

either way, if the cleric is stoking up on harm, and using them agressivly, he won't have heals.

which brings us to the power of heal.

if you limit heal, your limiting it because its 'only' 6th level, OR because it doesn't have a saving throw.

So you should compare it to higher level damaging spells as well as higher level healing spells.

how does Harm match up against say, implosion, energy drain, and destruction. sure these have saves but they are all save or die. harm doesn't kill you out right like they or even Slay living (5th level) does.

there is only ONE pure healing spell above HEAL....mass heal at 8th. other then that you got regeneration and resurection.

iso
"...where are my shoes?"

 

[Lucius Foxhound]

FlimFlam's right. After all, look at Phantasmal Killer... it's just a 4th level spell and it can kill anything instantly. Sure, they have to fail two saves ... but you get yourself Greater Spell Focus and a Headband of Intellect and you're going to kill lots of stuff instantly with a really high DC.. even at 7th level. And you don't even have to be anywhere near combat!

So sure, a Cleric can wade into combat and knock a dragon down to d4 HP without a save ... but then he's got to deal with the dragons minions who are just going to swarm all over and kill him.

When my Wizard got Phantasmal Killer and began wiping out monsters left and right, my smart DM began using True Seeing to negate it? Why? Because he's a decent DM.

If he'd been someone like Tom Cashel, well, he'd have no idea what he was doing... dragons would have no minions and the game would suck. Much like Tom Cashel sucks on a daily basis.

So yeah, I'm wary of house rules. An experienced DM such as IceBear might be able to balance out all the inconsistencies when you mess with rules, but most DMs don't have that ability. So the games end up sucking more than Tom Cashel on an average Friday night.

Harm. Love it or go play White Wolf.

 

[IceBear]

sorry Ice Bear, i miss read the entry on t-attack on page 125. thank you.

either way, if the cleric is stoking up on harm, and using them agressivly, he won't have heals.

which brings us to the power of heal.

if you limit heal, your limiting it because its 'only' 6th level, OR because it doesn't have a saving throw.

So you should compare it to higher level damaging spells as well as higher level healing spells.

how does Harm match up against say, implosion, energy drain, and destruction. sure these have saves but they are all save or die. harm doesn't kill you out right like they or even Slay living (5th level) does.

there is only ONE pure healing spell above HEAL....mass heal at 8th. other then that you got regeneration and resurection.

iso
"...where are my shoes?"

Agreed, but this is limited to combats where there are high level clerics on both sides - this is not usually the case.

The thing about the save or die effects is that all of these counters that people bring up for harm could be used against them too, and STILL the target (if the counters don't work) gets a save.

Yes, you're not dead after harm hits (unless you fail your massive damage save) but in practice you're either out of the fight or dead pretty shortly (if not immediately) after.

IceBear

 

[IceBear]

FlimFlam's right. After all, look at Phantasmal Killer... it's just a 4th level spell and it can kill anything instantly. Sure, they have to fail two saves ... but you get yourself Greater Spell Focus and a Headband of Intellect and you're going to kill lots of stuff instantly with a really high DC.. even at 7th level. And you don't even have to be anywhere near combat!

So sure, a Cleric can wade into combat and knock a dragon down to d4 HP without a save ... but then he's got to deal with the dragons minions who are just going to swarm all over and kill him.

When my Wizard got Phantasmal Killer and began wiping out monsters left and right, my smart DM began using True Seeing to negate it? Why? Because he's a decent DM.

If he'd been someone like Tom Cashel, well, he'd have no idea what he was doing... dragons would have no minions and the game would suck. Much like Tom Cashel sucks on a daily basis.

So yeah, I'm wary of house rules. An experienced DM such as IceBear might be able to balance out all the inconsistencies when you mess with rules, but most DMs don't have that ability. So the games end up sucking more than Tom Cashel on an average Friday night.

Harm. Love it or go play White Wolf.

Gee, and the players didn't go "Why weren't any monsters using True Seeing before?". Anyone can counter tactics using metagaming tactics. Hell, I could leave harm like it is and harm nuke the players into never using harm again. That might be a solution, but not one that my players (who are my friends too) would appreciate.

I'm getting tired of your snide remarks as you're nothing but a toll. There are very few "inconsistencies" introduced with giving harm a save. Players in my campaign will still play clerics and enjoy it. If they don't in yours, that's not my problem.

The only house rules that get introduced in my campaign are ones that make the game more fun for MY players. So, that's all I care about.

 

[Lucius Foxhound]

Actually, people seem to take things very personally when it comes to Harm? Why? Because they know changing the game is just plain wrong. But hey, if you can still look your players in the eye without them snickering things like, "Wonder what he'll house rule next!?" that's fine with me.

Consider the DC Heroes roleplaying game.. I hear its very good.

 

[Psion]

These are my beefs with it as written - yet I still use it unmodified in my games. Funny, huh?

BAB advancement bugs me immensely (AFIAC, it should be a skill), but that has way too many strings attached to it to fiddle with.

I didn't really worry about Harm until last week. I had gone a lont time without a credible cleric in the game, much less a high enough level one to cast harm, so I put off house ruling it.

But I forgot that a 21st level cleric got dropped into the party two levels ago. And he cast heal on a deathbringer that was supposted to be a tough foe, so I sort of house ruled it on the spot.

 

[Shard O'Glase]

Flesh to Stone is a level 6 spell for a Wizard/Sorcerer. Compare this to Harm now.

Stone to Flesh doesn't technically kill the opponent, but does turn them to stone (permanently I think). I suppose you could knock their head off after that. STF doesn't require a "to hit" roll, and has a range of about 100+ feet. It doesn't have to hit an AC, but a Fort save is required. You could enhance this with feats to help it penetrate the Fort save (Heighten spell, Spell Focus, Spell Penetration, etc.).

Actually a closer comparison would be look at imprisonment or temporal stasis. Both are no save spells, require touch and don't kill just incapaicitate. One of which you need to know lots of info on the target to work, the other needs a 5,000gp material component they are both 9th level.

Spells whether they have a ranged(and if have a range usually are effected by spell turning)or not usually require a save, and if there is no save are 8-9th level.

Saves are a very big ballancer, even ignoring DM fudging which I refuse to do It is just as easy or easier to get your saves high as it is to get the DCs high. Also most of the save or die spells target fort as there save giving a solid chance of saving for those who don't have the resources(magic) to defend themselves.

Try stone to flesh on a dragon see what happens, try harm on a dragon and see what happens. In one case I have to overcome the spell resistence and the dagon has to roll a 1 on their save, in the other just overome the spell resistance(not easy but do-able usualy a roll of 14ish)

Face most other big bads in the monster manuel and I might not ave to deal with SR just the save and frequently even when you buff your DCS the mosnter at worst had a 50/50 chance.(a well targeted spell charm monster vs a low will save creature means almost guaranteed success, but this means you have to have the right spell for the job prepared, with a no save spell I don't have to worry all my targets are equally valid)

 

[Berk]

heres a question for those that think harm is too powerful as is

do you apply the same rules to heal? ie if you have harm do d8+1 per level then does heal do the same?

 

[Psion]

Actually, people seem to take things very personally when it comes to Harm?

Throwing around comments like "real DMs don't depend on house rules" or some such nonsense is the type of thing that touches a cord with me. Harm itself is not worth getting bent out of shape over.