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

[Ferox4]

Okay, it's been some time since I've visited the boards on a regular basis, so don'y crucify me, but I am genuinely curious to see how the amended 3.5 version of Harm is working in other people's campaigns.

Well.......?

 

[Saeviomagy]

At a guess, it's stopped being the be-all-end-all clerical attack spell.

Mind you, I'm basing that on the fact that I've not seen any posts about it in 3.5 at all, suggesting that either
a) Noone uses it.
b) Noone has a problem with it.

I'd be more inclined to run with B, because if the case was A, then people would be bitching about how worthless it was.

 

[James McMurray]

The cleric in my party doesn't use it. He prefers blade barrier. That's likely just a personal choice, although the barriers have done some serious damage in the past (usually when a creature is forced to stay inside of it or come through it).

 

[Ycore Rixle]

Working out great for us.

 

[hong]

I've killed two PCs with it already. Well, one PC twice, in two successive sessions.

It's still a very potent spell at mid-levels. 150 points is sufficient to kill almost any 11th-12th level character, especially if they've been softened up beforehand. However, the best part is that you're guaranteed of doing significant damage even if the target saves. That makes it better than slay living, which is a lottery against anything with a good Fort save.

 

[Plane Sailing]

The cleric in my party doesn't use it. He prefers blade barrier. That's likely just a personal choice, although the barriers have done some serious damage in the past (usually when a creature is forced to stay inside of it or come through it).

Is that using the new 3.5e blade barrier, which is just a wall of blades instead of the enormous cuisinart that the 3.0e version created?

I only ask because "stay inside it" doesn't have the same meaning as it used to.

Cheers

 

[Shard O'Glase]

well its a more balanced spell than the 3e version but its still too good. A wizards damage dealing spells at 6th level would cap out at 20d6 at 20th level, or roughly 70 points of damage maybe with a save for 1/2 damage. The cleric gets a spell that does 150, 75 on a save when they hit 15th level.

Wiz/sor should be better at damage dealing the spell is still broken, just not as broken as before. And certainly not at the top of the list of most broken spells anymore.(I'm going with shapechange this edition)

 

[kilamanjaro]

well its a more balanced spell than the 3e version but its still too good. A wizards damage dealing spells at 6th level would cap out at 20d6 at 20th level, or roughly 70 points of damage maybe with a save for 1/2 damage. The cleric gets a spell that does 150, 75 on a save when they hit 15th level.

Wiz/sor should be better at damage dealing the spell is still broken, just not as broken as before. And certainly not at the top of the list of most broken spells anymore.(I'm going with shapechange this edition)

But the wizard's spells are going to hit multiple targets at range. Harm is only one creature and you have to touch them. Big difference.

 

[Shard O'Glase]

But the wizard's spells are going to hit multiple targets at range. Harm is only one creature and you have to touch them. Big difference.

No a wizards spell might hit multiple targets at range like chain lightning or they may hit one target at range like polar ray an 8th level spell which does up to 25d6 at short range which is hard ot hit unless your epic or have the right prestige classes and still does barely more than harm after a save at 15th level, and thanks to harms touch range if you misss you can attack again and still deliver the touch polar ray if it misses is just wasted.

Touch range should at best bring a clerics offensive power in line with a wizards at range spell, it should never be better than a wizards damage dealing spells of the same level. Harm is better so its still not balanced.

 

[Shadeus]

No a wizards spell might hit multiple targets at range like chain lightning or they may hit one target at range like polar ray an 8th level spell which does up to 25d6 at short range which is hard ot hit unless your epic or have the right prestige classes and still does barely more than harm after a save at 15th level, and thanks to harms touch range if you misss you can attack again and still deliver the touch polar ray if it misses is just wasted.

Touch range should at best bring a clerics offensive power in line with a wizards at range spell, it should never be better than a wizards damage dealing spells of the same level. Harm is better so its still not balanced.

You could compare Harm to Disintegrate (also a 6th-level spell). At 2d6 per level capped at 40d6, it averages 140 pts of damage. Although there are downsides to it:

- Harm caps at level 15 and disintegrate caps at level 20. You must be level 20 to ave. 140.
- "Holding the charge" melee touch vs. a wasted ranged touch (like you said)

Harm is slightly less versitile in that undead are immune to it. And disintegrate has better utility uses. Good luck getting passed the locked iron door with a harm spell.

Just some thoughts...