Harm and failed saves

[Dracorat]

Does Harm kill someone who fails their save (and who has insufficient HP to otherwise survive such failure)? Obviously, it will not kill anyone who makes their save (reducing them to 1 HP) but does that include those who failed?

Exact wording:

Harm
Necromancy
Level: Clr 6, Destruction 6
Components: V, S
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: Touch
Target: Creature touched
Duration: Instantaneous
Saving Throw: Will half; see text
Spell Resistance: Yes

Harm charges a subject with negative energy that deals 10 points of damage per caster level (to a maximum of 150 points at 15th level). If the creature successfully saves, harm deals half this amount, but it cannot reduce the target’s hit points to less than 1.

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

 

[Hypersmurf]

As written, Harm cannot reduce your hit points below 1 if you save. This restriction does not exist if you do not save.

-Hyp.

 

[Felix]

Default condition: target takes 10 damage /level, max 150.

If clause: If save, then 5 damage /level, max 75 and cannot reduce below 1.

----

Hyp's got it right; as written, only if you save does the "not below 1" protection exist.

----

This is most likely due to sloppy writing; Harm has never been a killer spell, successful saving throw or not, and because the intent of the revision was to make this spell less powerful, I suspect they would have included the not-below-1-HP restriction, had they not erred.

This is, however, speculation, and perfectly sound ground on which to base a House Rule. Regardless, as the spell is written, this is not the case.

 

[Cedric]

HARM!! ...or, as it's known in 3.5..MILDLY SPRAIN!

I hate this version of the spell.

 

[Dracorat]

As written, Harm cannot reduce your hit points below 1 if you save. This restriction does not exist if you do not save.

-Hyp.

That's what I thought, though I most often see it played with the other interpretation (that is, that it could not take you below 1 regardless of save or not).

 

[shilsen]

HARM!! ...or, as it's known in 3.5..MILDLY SPRAIN!

I hate this version of the spell.

In 3.5, if you fail your save (as pointed out above), it can kill.

 

[Infiniti2000]

This is most likely due to sloppy writing; Harm has never been a killer spell, successful saving throw or not, and because the intent of the revision was to make this spell less powerful, I suspect they would have included the not-below-1-HP restriction, had they not erred.

I don't think it was an error at all. I think the killing ability of harm is perfectly justified and balanced. Would you rather get hit by a 5th level spell, slay living, and fail your save, or a 6th level spell, harm, and fail your save? Are you really willing to argue that you'd prefer to get hit by a 6th level spell? That should be a clue that something would be wrong.

This is, however, speculation, and perfectly sound ground on which to base a House Rule. Regardless, as the spell is written, this is not the case.

I disagree that it's sound ground. I think it makes the spell maybe 4.5th level at best.

 

[Felix]

I think the killing ability of harm is perfectly justified and balanced.

Oh, I agree with you. I mostly suspect that it was an error because it seemed odd that Wizards should simultaneously nerf a spell while changing a previously defining characteristic to make it more powerful.

I disagree that it's sound ground. I think it makes the spell maybe 4.5th level at best.

I agree that it would make the spell a 4.5 level spell at best; I'm simply suggesting that this was the intent of the revision: to make Harm an altogether less powerful spell. A defining characteristic of this spell was that it would never outright kill anyone. This has changed in the revision to 3.5, though with only a slight change in syntax that saftey would still be there.

Besides, when you're talking about House Rules, how much solid ground do you need other than, "I prefer it this way"? Harm never having been capable of killing in the past is a perfectly legitimate support to House Rule it back, though I agree with you that it would make the spell less potent than the average spell of its level. If someone was looking to do just that, the questionable phrasing of the spell description and the spell's history render more than enough justification, even though I don't think the spell's power warrants another such restriction.

 

[Vegepygmy]

As written, Harm cannot reduce your hit points below 1 if you save. This restriction does not exist if you do not save.

While Hypersmurf is correct that as written the restriction applies only if you save (and I rule the same way in my own games, too), it should be pointed out that the 3.5 FAQ disagrees:

"The harm spell deals 10 points of damage per caster level (to a maximum of 150 points at 15th level) and cannot take a target’s hit points to less than 1. If the target creature makes a successful saving throw, the damage is reduced by half, but the spell still cannot reduce the target’s hit points to less than 1."

 

[Felix]

3.5 FAQ

Infiniti, here's precedent in the house-ruling department for you!