Countering Harm

[IceBear]

No, I don't think it makes much sense.

Slay living is a 5th level touch spell that kills it victim on a failed save and inflict damage on a successful save. Harm wouldn't be much of a 6th level spell under your first option.

Harm should remain a no save touch spell IMO.

If you want to houserule it, and some designers such as Monte Cook have advised it, the most popular option is to put a damage cap to the spell AFAIK. Something around 100 HP would work fine.

Actually, here was what Monte said on harm (from my notes):

Monte Cook's opinion on harm: I think harm is a mistake. Harm should allow for a Fort save, with the target losing 4d8+caster level hp on a successful save

I personally have harm causing d8 points of damage per caster level (but no lower than 5hp) on a successful Will save (why should a failed save not kill you and a successful one would?). This keeps it in line with the other inflict spells.

Yes, I know all about this seemingly weakening the spell compared to Slay Living, but I just don't like no save spells, and a damage cap still would let it bring a lot of mid-level opponents to the point of death fairly easily, if there is no Save.

I see a damage cap as a good solution too, it's just not one that I personally like - I like for the PCs to have a chance to avoid massive amounts of damage by making a Save. Having someone touch them (which is relatively easy) and telling them - you just lost 100 hitpoints, that leaves you with 18 - isn't sporting in my opinion.

IceBear

 

[Rowenstin]

If the cleric tries to harm a monster with reach (and the monster is somewhat inteligent) use the attack of opportunity to trip the cleric. With the bonus of strenght and size of big monsters you cant lose the trip. This tactic will make dragons almost inmune to harm; just be sure to kill teh cleric the following round.

 

[-Eä-]

Our version of harm is:

Will save for 100 damage, or 1d4 hit points left if you have under 100 hit points. The new solution may be: If the character saves, the spell does 10*caser level damage, if that is under his normal allotment of hit points.

 

[gfunk]

Last week our party Avg level 12.5 took out a Mature Adult Red Dragon (CR 17) with Harm. The Dragon dispelled all of the protective spells on the Cleric first, except for Haste (from Boots of Speed). Then, the Cleirc ran up to the Dragon and harmed him twice (he has insanely high Concentration) -- the first failed to go through SR, but the second one did. On the next round I MM the dragon into oblivion.

- My apologies to B.A.D.D.

If it's any consolation, the cleric ate it too.

 

[Uller]

Why would a mature adult red allow a party of adventurers to catch it on the ground for more than a round?

Anyway...

If you want to rule-0 Harm _and_ balance with Slay Living....

******************************
Harm
Necromancy
Level: Clr 6, Destruction 6, Drd 7
Components: V, S
Casting Time: 1 action
Range: Touch
Target: Creature touched
Duration: Instantaneous
Saving Throw: Fortitude half
Spell Resistance: Yes

Harm charges a subject with negative energy that causes the loss of all but 1d4 hit points. If the subject makes a successful Fortitude save, he loses half his current hit points.

If used on an undead creature, harm acts like heal.
************************************

There...so it trumps Slay Living on two counts:

1) The save is slightly tougher.
2) On a failed save against a "fresh" opponent, it still does significant damage but leaves the opponent able to survive a MM.

 

[gfunk]

Why would a mature adult red allow a party of adventurers to catch it on the ground for more than a round?

Well in our case the Cleric was using a Mask of Flying (From MaOF) and everyone else in the party was flying per the spell.

 

[MeanGenes]

Some harm defensive tactics:

1) Spell resistance. Get something with a ton of spell resistance through either natural ability or spells.

2) mirror image. Touch the wrong image, charge goes poof.

3) undead illusionist. Use illusions to give the appearance of being alive. He touches undead with harm and he's healed back to full (-1d4).

4) incorporeal opponent. He can't harm what he can't touch. Have your big bad guy cast Ghostform (T&B spell).

5) High touch-attack AC. Natural armor and armor bonuses do not work against harm. Buff up the bad guy with other AC bonuses with dodge and expertise feats, rings of protection (deflection), gloves of dexterity, and shield spell (cover bonus).

6) Concealment. Same effect as high touch-attack AC. Use blur, displacement, blink, improved invis, etc.

7) Range. Unless he has the reach feat or the reach ability from heirophant, he has to touch the big bad guy. Surround him with mid-level fodder than can survive a fireball or two. Or fly him around (but give him wings so his flight can't be dispelled) .

8) Counterspell/dispel. Give the big bad guy the reactive counterspell feat. If the cleric tries to cast harm, he counterspells it. Or if the cleric casts harm, cast dispel magic on him before he can get the touch attack off. Harm charge goes poof!

9) monster with reach. If the cleric enters the monster's threatened range, the monster uses a trip attack (though to be fair, he'd only do this if he had spellcraft or could tell there was a charge on the cleric's hand). Then when the cleric is down dispel him or kill him.

Try these ideas and let me know if they work.

 

[Junkheap]

Harm again

As far as these discussions have bee going, i don't think a save is fair at all.

If you make it fort save, fighter classes benefit and everyone else gets screwed as normal.
If you make it will save, fighters classes get screwed.
You can't make it reflex, although the rogue in our camapign started arguing because he can "dodge" the touch better, but it really doesn't change the effectiveness of the spell.

In 2e, i don't think it was that much of a desl. You had no touch ac, and still had to hit the armor class of the opponent, then MR, plus creatures only had max 250 HP(as i recall). Not like in 3e where a dragon or some creatures could easily top 600 and touch AC usually sux butt.

And i really don't like montes suggested rule change, good idea tho, because then harm wouldn't affect undead would it? If its a fort save and it does not affect objects, undead are immune to it. So you CANNOT harm an undead but you could HEAL it for 1d4 hp left. Hopefully everyone is there with me on that explanation.

My suggested changes to heal/harm would be to:

Make then positive/negative energy. You can cast protective spells to ignore harm/heal.

Make it an average of fort/will, because you are in my mind resisting the effect with your mind as well as your body. Sorry rogue it is in NO way a reflex save. They already get a bonus to the ac due to high dex.

And if you make the save(which whith the above method i think is fair)they take half thier remaing HP in damage. So eventually this spell becomes useless, but it has the potential to do lots of damge either way. But tough creatures WILL make thier save, still takes massive damage, BUT be able to survive the fight and still go on. If you fail the save, well then you had your chance, just like a destruction or disintergrate, except with 1d4 hp and a sliver of hope.

What do you guys think? Would this work? I still think harm would be very deadly with this change and does not neuter it, and give favouritisnm to certain classes.

PS for those who say classes with high fort and will save bebefit more, the rogue classes will on most occasions have a higher touch AC than anybody else(usually)

 

[CRGreathouse]

Re: Harm again

And i really don't like montes suggested rule change, good idea tho, because then harm wouldn't affect undead would it? If its a fort save and it does not affect objects, undead are immune to it. So you CANNOT harm an undead but you could HEAL it for 1d4 hp left. Hopefully everyone is there with me on that explanation.

You realize that that's the way it works now? Harm heals undead.

 

[Henry@home]

No, I don't think it makes much sense.

Slay living is a 5th level touch spell that kills it victim on a failed save and inflict damage on a successful save. Harm wouldn't be much of a 6th level spell under your first option.

Harm should remain a no save touch spell IMO.

Instead of this, if one is worried about harm but not weakening it to the point of a 5th level spell, why not house rule it to be a will save with 10d6 damage if it succeeds? after all, Destruction is a ranged 7th level spell that requires no attack roll that does this much (the main difference being a fortitude save vs. a will save). As it stands, Harm is actually just as deadly as a spell one level higher - and an 11th+ level cleric doesn't have much to fear from getting into melee combat long enough to use a harm spell.

What made harm so deadly in third edition is the fact that it is now a touch attack spell, whereas in 2nd edition it used the enemy's whole armor class.