Instead of insulting other forum members, can you give us a good reason why it isn't broken in your campaign, besides your "superior" DM style?Harm's fine as is. It just takes a good enough DM to play it right.
(Psi)SeveredHead said:Instead of insulting other forum members, can you give us a good reason why it isn't broken in your campaign, besides your "superior" DM style?
Creampuff said:I had a party averaging 16th level fight a white slaad (CR 21 in the Epic Levels handbook), and they were getting worked until the cleric casting on the defensive cast harm and droped the creature from 300+ hp down to 3.
Chun-tzu said:One of THE most common house rules for D&D 3E is a save of some kind for Harm.
Lucius Foxhound said:
Ask Tom Cashel... he may let you join S.H.I.N.Y.
Celtavian said:
Your DM would basically have to make most creatures running cowards until they killed all the clerics to be run well according to their logic. They couldn't enter melee or stay in any kind of attack range period.
zorlag said:Anyone who thinks Harm is fine, try [...] playing those evil clerics to the hilt, using timed combinations of harm and quickened spells or some other people who can attack after harm...
Henry said:
3) TO ANY POSTER - I'll say this once - if there is ANY insulting of fellow posters' campaigns, intelligence, or play style, or any rabid flames, this becomes the first thread of the New Year to be closed. Deal?
Enkhidu said:Then place Heal at 8th level and Mass Heal at 9th. Problem solved.

(Dungeons & Dragons)
Rulebook featuring "high magic" options, including a host of new spells.