Crit with Harm?
Aust Diamondew
First Post
If a spell has an attack roll you can critically hit with it. I'm pretty sure harm is a touch attack so you can critically hit with it. Now heres a good quesitoin:
What happens if you critcally hit with a cure spell or a heal spell?
Against undead double damage obviously but is it double healing if used on an ally? (normally the 'attack roll' is just assumed to hit but technically it is a touch spell)
What happens if you critcally hit with a cure spell or a heal spell?
Against undead double damage obviously but is it double healing if used on an ally? (normally the 'attack roll' is just assumed to hit but technically it is a touch spell)
Orm
Explorer
Just found it in the SRD:
Touch
You must touch a creature or object to affect it. A touch spell that deals damage can score a critical hit just as a weapon can. A touch spell threatens a critical hit on a natural roll of 20 and deals double damage on a successful critical hit. Some touch spells allow you to touch multiple targets. You can touch as many willing targets as you can reach as part of the casting, but all targets of the spell must be touched in the same round that you finish casting the spell.
Orm
Touch
You must touch a creature or object to affect it. A touch spell that deals damage can score a critical hit just as a weapon can. A touch spell threatens a critical hit on a natural roll of 20 and deals double damage on a successful critical hit. Some touch spells allow you to touch multiple targets. You can touch as many willing targets as you can reach as part of the casting, but all targets of the spell must be touched in the same round that you finish casting the spell.
Orm
you could technically crit while healing if you roll to hit. It is assumed you do not have to roll to hit an ally to cure them. I would be willing to allow someone to roll to hit an ally so they could crit since they are also taking a chance of missing which would suck if that cuases someone low on Hpts to die becuase the cleric rolled a one. It balances out.
I wouldn't allow it outside of combat or when the roll to hit has no real consequences.
Later
I wouldn't allow it outside of combat or when the roll to hit has no real consequences.
Later
Dark Dragon
Explorer
Ouch 
...crit confirmed by a caster of level 15, opponent fails the save => 300 points of damage => smack down qualified...
...crit confirmed by a caster of level 15, opponent fails the save => 300 points of damage => smack down qualified...
Infiniti2000
First Post
No, because you only crit with a spell that deals damage. It deals damage against undead so you can crit, but not against non-undead.Aust Diamondew said:
It's arguable whether or not on a failed save the victim is limited to a minimum of 1hp. Many feel that the text of harm says that the minimum only applies on a made save, not a failed save. Others think it applies all the time.Dark Dragon said:
TheGogmagog
First Post
If not all undead, most undead are immune to crits, so you still can't crit someone immune to crits.Infiniti2000 said:
Vorpal effects and Vampires are an exception that would be the first place to find a loophole that contradicts this. I think you still wind up with the crit confirmation takes place but has no effect on damage, just special effects like flaming burst and vorpal.
From the 'Touch Attack' quote above, the attack must deal damage to crit. A touch attack that heals cannot crit.
The Edge
First Post
Personaly I wouldn't allow a crit for either cure or harm regardless of circumstances. I don't see it as doing physical damage but rather as targeting the targets life force, and that it doesn't matter where that life force is because whats left will ballance out any way.
So, I'd say no crits. Sure other spells still do, but not this.
So, I'd say no crits. Sure other spells still do, but not this.
RigaMortus2
First Post
I thought undead were immune to crits?
Similar Threads
