If Harm is broken, what's the best house rule for it?

[Leopold]

An evil cleric?

the PC cleric in my game is good. He gets his spell that allows him to heal his damage like a cure then that's no problem.

I have no issue with the PC's taking heal spells and curing all 400+ pts of damage I did to them, hell they STILL have to touch them though! and when they are up that high to begin with you have critters with reach and grapple and SR's to make it nastier.


I am vehmetly in the "Save Needed" camp. something like that just deserves a save even a will save would be fine..

 

[Leopold]

And how is this different, power-wise, from a spell that can instantly restore 1000+ hp?

1 takes HP's away
1 grants HP's

1 you can use OUT Of combat
1 you have to use IN combat


Even the tohit roll is fine but a save is needed to drop something from 1k+ hp's to 1d4. The same applies to the PC's.

Now the save I have stated was "Instead of doing 1d4 HP left if he passes he sufferes 1/2 HP damage and keeps an additional 1d4"

to me that is fair and balanced. You don't lose it all you lose 1/2 as that is what most saves grant. THAT I can live with..

 

[jgbrowning]

broken.. very

dont use it.

harm + haste is a death sentance for everything.


joe b.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

An empowered Blade Barrier is an 8th-level spell, and it has no realistic chance of killing a dragon in 2 rounds. Furthermore, the dragon gets a save against Blade Barrier, and then gets to move away (no damage next round). Yeah... I'll cast the 6th-level spell, it's better.

The Earthquake example wasn't very good. How often do PCs face hordes of weak creatures, making an appropriate challenge? You'd be better off casting Fireball or Fire Storm.

Heal is porobably broken when used by a 600 hp dragon. However, it's not broken when used by a PC, who won't have that kind of hp until epic levels. ELH discussions, BTW, are another thing.

"at such a level" a fighter can do mucho damage.

Really? Without using a smackdown or deliberate looking for loopholes, I've seen a psychic warrior do 80 damage per round. I've yet to see a psychic warrior do 600+ damage per round, even if using Pssychofeedback with a scythe, Haste, Power Attack, and landing all crits!

Against a fully armored and buffed cleric? That is unlikely.

Clerics tend to have poor touch ACs, even if they do use Prayer, Bane and Shield of Faith.

So, there should be someting In between, a touch spell that does mondo damage.

You consider doing 600+ damage mondo damage?? Isn't 250 damage enough for you? Sheesh... even Power Word Kill doesn't have that kind of power.

But look at it in the wider context--those are the best clerical spells, hands-down, for dealing or healing damage. You put a cap on those and clerics can't stand up to wizards anymore.

See Power Word Kill. You don't need to make a spell overpowered to balance the cleric. The cleric's spells are almost as good, he gets more spells/day, better saving throws, better AC, more hp...

And how is this different, power-wise, from a spell that can instantly restore 1000+ hp?

You have a PC with that many hp? Find me a non-epic monster with that many hp.

 

[BBrendolfus]

I see no need to change harm, the players have a love/hate relationship with it.

Perhaps a fort save to halve hp loss?

 

[Furn_Darkside]

Against a fully armored and buffed cleric? That is unlikely.

Clerics tend to have poor touch ACs, even if they do use Prayer, Bane and Shield of Faith.

You are taking my comment out of context- it was in response to the idea that since Harm requires a touch attack, the high level fighter with 3 hp left can dish out an equal amount of punishment in one round. Thus, balancing the spell.

FD

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Sorry.
I think maybe people need to use emoticons more often.

 

[gfunk]

As a DM, I have discussed this topic extensively with my players. We want to have fun in our campaign and if modifying or changing some spells is a way to do that, we are both for it.

My players wanted to add a Will save (partial), but I argued for a hitpoint cap instead. I managed to convince them that Harm can inflict a maximum of 10 hp/level (max 200) with no save. We feel that this stays true to the "spirit" of the spell while preventing gross abuses with creatures with hundreds of hit points.

I don't agree personally with the premise,

"If the PCs can do it, I can do it to!"

This is not the real world, it's just a game. The bottom line is fun. If enjoyment is being sapped in an individual campaign and the participants agree that it should be changed . . . well, it's pretty much a no-brainer . . .

 

[Lucius Foxhound]

You guys are nuts. Harm's great, but come on! It's not that great considering it's pretty high level spell.

Why is it not broken? Here's why:

1. All you need is a fly spell to avoid it... or be able to fly.

2. Clerics can't even use Spectral Hand or a Familiar to deliver the blow. They have to step up in front of the big red dragon (beat it's spell resistance) and deliver a touch attack.

3. And as for combining it with haste, Clerics can't even cast that spell, so they'd be relying on Wizardly help.

4. Also, it doesn't even kill you! It just knocks you down to 1-4 HP, giving most creatures a chance to get away and heal.


So basically, if you're a DM and you feel the need to give people a save vs. Harm. Well, I guess you suck at being a DM.

 

[Furn_Darkside]

"If the PCs can do it, I can do it to!"

I do use that line, but I add the words "and usually better" to the end.

My players tend to be good at not being cheap- just because they know that exploiting something is the quickest way to have it used against them.

But.

I don't want my npc's wiped out with a touch- and they don't want their pc's wiped out with a touch. The problem is solved with a saving throw. And the fun continues

FD