Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celtavian" data-source="post: 1077638" data-attributes="member: 5834">In some cases, Harm is not one of them.You do so, you know that every version of the spell ever written did not kill its target. the new version is not a death spell and does not kill its target whether or not the save is failed.It doesn' have the [death] descriptor which is another indicator that it cannot kill even on a failed save. The hit point damage is a new mechanic, but the intent is the same as all previous versions of the spell.It is not a direct damage spell doing dice damage. It is an attempt to balance an overly powerful spell while not making it worthless. It is not a perfect attempt, but it is clear that the intent of the spell is the same as previous versions.I don't argue that it wasn't written well, but I do argue that the intent is clear.Yes, the change to Darkness spells was pathetic whether or not the change was poorly explained. I agree for Darkness since the spell itself has changed, not just the mechanic. Heck, I don't even think this spell should be named Darkness anymore it has changed so much.For Harm I vehemently disagree. The intent of the spell is exactly the same as previous versions save for it has been balanced according to the maximum affect it can have. The intent of the spell has not changed. It was never meant to kill and it is clear that they did not intend it to do so now. Though I admit that the wording is a bit off.</blockquote>