D&D 3E/3.5 How's 3.5 Harm working for you? (stirring mud from the river bottom)

[Apok]

I'd say the changes were a definite improvement, but Harm does indeed outrank any comparable wizard's spell in terms of damage. The fact that it's touch range is the one main balancing factor, along with the assumption that the purpose of a Wizard isn't to kill opponents, but to soften them up from affar with spells so that the real damage dealing powerhouses, the Fighters, can mop up with little effort.

Let's face it; a Wizard just isn't capable of destroying equivalent level threats like he used to. The fact that their damage-dealing spells have pretty much been nerfed across the boards means that their purpose really has shifted to battlefield support.

As an aside, when making a comparison between two or more spells, I always advocate the assumption of a successfull saving throw. Once you get to a certain point in the game, failed saving throws become a rarity on both sides of the DM screen.

 

[Dthamilaye]

Well, that is a whole lot of proviso's and unusual circumstances including epic levels or a 3.0e broken prestige class...

So I guess in a roundabout way you are saying that Polar Ray is really a not very OK spell after all

Well, true. In normal circumstances, it is quite a sucky spell.

What I was trying to say was that it is the best (?) spell to expand in power, IF you got the goods.

Harm is max 150/75 damage. Thats it. Just the same if your caster is 15th or 45th level. On the other hand, with Polar ray it is possible to use all the possible metamagics there are in the books and everything comes with no save and a possibility to crit (or miss, of course). And for much larger range than Harm.

The players IMC are going for 30th+ levels (Now around 19th) and I'm 99% sure I won't be using epic spellcasting before something like 40th level. Now what do the arcane casters take for damage spells for levels 21-40? They have liked Polar ray quite much for that. Use Archamge to change to needed energy, no save, improved critical to do double damage, incantatrix to lower metamagics, use MetaRods and epic feats.

It does come out nicely (imho) after all that.


Now, I'm not blind or deaf to suggestions, so if anyone has better damage dealing alternatives for 21st-40th level casters that don't have access to epic spells, I'm quite interested to find out.

-Meteor swarm is nice, but the single target is worse than polar ray, as it is only 24d6 without save. The 2d6 bludgeoning is stopped by any epic monster DR.

-Energy Drain is always good when metamagiced. But it does not really deal damage.

-Horrid wilting has a save and works only on living creatures.

 

[Li Shenron]

Well, true. In normal circumstances, it is quite a sucky spell.

What I was trying to say was that it is the best (?) spell to expand in power, IF you got the goods.

Harm is max 150/75 damage. Thats it. Just the same if your caster is 15th or 45th level. On the other hand, with Polar ray it is possible to use all the possible metamagics there are in the books and everything comes with no save and a possibility to crit (or miss, of course). And for much larger range than Harm.

...

What? Polar Ray is an 8th level spells, which is already 2 levels more than Harm and therefore there only few metamagic feats you can apply to it. The ones that increase damage are Empower (+2) and Maximize (+3) which you cannot use at all.

The no save is the only advantage, but OTOH there's the ranged attack which gives you one shot, if you miss the effect is zero. Harm requires a touch attack, if you miss you have one or more retries in the next round, and successful save only halves the damage.

Harm is definitely a winner in the damage, 10/level against d6/level which on the average is about 3 times.

The damage type is also better because there's no energy resistance which can help you, altho you can't target undead.

You can score a critical with Harm also.

Perhaps Polar Ray is great at epic levels, then why is it in the core PHB? I want to point out that a maximized Polay Ray would be 11th level and would deal at 25th level 25x6=150 which is exactly what Harm does at 15th level and by being a 6th level spell only.

IMHO the only thing that really capped Harm was that it could not kill a thing, but in 3.5 that works only if the target wins the save.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

The no save is the only advantage, but OTOH there's the ranged attack which gives you one shot, if you miss the effect is zero.

The ranged attack won't be too hard, as it's ranged touch, and wizards tend to have a decent dex (and if they are the type who use rays, they may have weapon feats on ray spells).

Harm is definitely a winner in the damage, 10/level against d6/level which on the average is about 3 times.

Make that 5/lv if the enemy makes his save. That's often the case.

The damage type is also better because there's no energy resistance which can help you, altho you can't target undead.

There's death ward. In addition to undead, there are a lot of characters that use that spell, especially if they go against priests. OTOH, not so many characters bother with resistance to cold, and monsters often have not more than cold res 10 (although there are those who are immune to cold, but they aren't that numerous)

Perhaps Polar Ray is great at epic levels, then why is it in the core PHB? I want to point out that a maximized Polay Ray would be 11th level and would deal at 25th level 25x6=150 which is exactly what Harm does at 15th level and by being a 6th level spell only.

It has its uses in non-epic game also. It actually is most fun with epic levels, when you empower, maximize, intensify it, or if you sneak attack with it (epic arcana trickster)

IMHO the only thing that really capped Harm was that it could not kill a thing, but in 3.5 that works only if the target wins the save.

That's arguable, and remains so unless some official says one way or the other. Until then, I won't engage in useless semantics. And I think most use it the way it's meant to be used: Harm doesn't reduce you to 0 or less.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

DR does not stop meteor swarm's bludgeoning damage.

 

[Plane Sailing]

That's arguable, and remains so unless some official says one way or the other. Until then, I won't engage in useless semantics. And I think most use it the way it's meant to be used: Harm doesn't reduce you to 0 or less.

I thought you were not going to engage in that particular debate? Without talking about the details there is, after all, no grounds for saying that harm doesn't ever reduce you to 0 or less

 

[Li Shenron]

The ranged attack won't be too hard, as it's ranged touch, and wizards tend to have a decent dex (and if they are the type who use rays, they may have weapon feats on ray spells).

On the average it is easier than the melee touch attack, but I would really prefer not to lose the spell if I miss, which is the case for melee touch spells!

That's arguable, and remains so unless some official says one way or the other. Until then, I won't engage in useless semantics. And I think most use it the way it's meant to be used: Harm doesn't reduce you to 0 or less.

"Useless semantics" is what everyone uses against "common sense" or "rules spirit" and it officially wins. In my own gaming I always put common sense & rules spirit before semantics, but I cannot do it much here without usually being knocked off. I really hope as you probably do too that we will get a clarification. It's very frustrating when a comma instead of a fullstop in a sentence seems to change a rule singificantly

If the creature successfully saves, harm deals half this amount, but it cannot reduce the target’s hit points to less than 1.

 

[Clumsy Bob]

If the creature successfully saves, harm deals half this amount, but it cannot reduce the target’s hit points to less than 1.

IMO this should apply to the failed save as well. Harm is one of those spells that have carried across all editions of D&D (sacred cow I think) like magic missle.
I agree that in 3.0 it was far too powerful but I beleive that this had more to do with the vast increase in HP's that PC's and monsters have.
For example in 1E the maximum hit points an ancient dragon would have is 88, but now it is 300+. To deal this damage in a 6th lvl spell is horrifing.
As a compromise, and to keep the spirit of the original spell I would still maintain the damage dealt now, but still not allow the target to drop below 1HP.
The reverse is applicable to heal, but I still feel there is a requirement for a higher level healing spell that can restore a creature to full HP's (or lose all in the inflict version) perhaps a greater heal/harm?

Thoughts

Bob

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

IMO this should apply to the failed save as well. Harm is one of those spells that have carried across all editions of D&D (sacred cow I think) like magic missle.
I agree that in 3.0 it was far too powerful but I beleive that this had more to do with the vast increase in HP's that PC's and monsters have.
For example in 1E the maximum hit points an ancient dragon would have is 88, but now it is 300+. To deal this damage in a 6th lvl spell is horrifing.
As a compromise, and to keep the spirit of the original spell I would still maintain the damage dealt now, but still not allow the target to drop below 1HP.
The reverse is applicable to heal, but I still feel there is a requirement for a higher level healing spell that can restore a creature to full HP's (or lose all in the inflict version) perhaps a greater heal/harm?

Thoughts

Bob

Unfortunately that version of heal could break epic creatures with 7,000 hp and if greater harm is the same thing as 3.0 harm then it would still be broken, unless it has a save for some smaller amount of damage.

 

[Kae'Yoss]

"Useless semantics" is what everyone uses against "common sense" or "rules spirit" and it officially wins. In my own gaming I always put common sense & rules spirit before semantics, but I cannot do it much here without usually being knocked off. I really hope as you probably do too that we will get a clarification. It's very frustrating when a comma instead of a fullstop in a sentence seems to change a rule singificantly

It's what I think, too. IMO harm isn't meant to put you below 1 hp, no matter whether that save was made or not.