Balancing 0-level spells for undead casters


Combat & Magic


If we're going to get rid of cure minor wounds, we should also get rid of inflict minor wounds simply out of a sake... purity? Regardless, an undead cleric who gets away and has sufficient time can completely heal himself without touching any spells or rebuke attempts. My suggestion is this:

Quote:

Bleed

Necromancy
Level: Clr 0
Components: V, S
Casting Time: 1 Standard action
Range: Touch
Target: Creature touched
Duration: Instantaneous
Saving Throw: Will negates
Spell Resistance: Yes

When laying your hand upon a creature that is at or below 0 hit points and is stable, you immediately open it's wounds causing it to fall unconscious and begin dying.

Thoughts?


that works I like it


I like it as well. It's got my vote.

Scarab Sages

Pathfinder Card Game, Rulebook Subscriber

I had already nixed inflict minor wounds in my playtesting so that replacement spell looks pretty good.


It's like a lesser death knell. It has my mark of groovy on it. Plus inflict does generally need to disappear.

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 16, 2012 Top 32

I like this idea. Though I'd call the replacement spell bleed out and I'd have it automatically kill the target. (You can already coup de grace a downed creature with a dagger, so a 0-level spell that does essentially the same thing wouldn't be that unbalancing.)

Dark Archive

Nice replacement , good idea.

Paizo Employee Director of Game Design

Fantastic.

Consider it added.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing

Paizo Employee Director of Game Design

Epic Meepo wrote:
I like this idea. Though I'd call the replacement spell bleed out and I'd have it automatically kill the target. (You can already coup de grace a downed creature with a dagger, so a 0-level spell that does essentially the same thing wouldn't be that unbalancing.)

This is true, but a coup de grace is a full round action. This would be a standard.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 16, 2012 Top 32

Jason Bulmahn wrote:

This is true, but a coup de grace is a full round action. This would be a standard.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing

No problem: just change the casting time so it isn't a standard action.


Epic Meepo wrote:
Jason Bulmahn wrote:

This is true, but a coup de grace is a full round action. This would be a standard.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing

No problem: just change the casting time so it isn't a standard action.

The only problem I see with this that, essentially, you're making an entirely new spell as opposed to a mirror revision of cure minor.

Liberty's Edge

Golarion Goblin wrote:
Epic Meepo wrote:
Jason Bulmahn wrote:

This is true, but a coup de grace is a full round action. This would be a standard.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing

No problem: just change the casting time so it isn't a standard action.
The only problem I see with this that, essentially, you're making an entirely new spell as opposed to a mirror revision of cure minor.

Yeah, I agree. A zero-level standard action coup-de-grace might be a bit too much, especially with sleep spells being flung about at low levels, and arbitrarily making it a full round cast seems weird.

Love the 'un-stabilizing' zero level spell though. Slick idea; nice to see it'll be added!


Jason Bulmahn wrote:
Epic Meepo wrote:
I like this idea. Though I'd call the replacement spell bleed out and I'd have it automatically kill the target. (You can already coup de grace a downed creature with a dagger, so a 0-level spell that does essentially the same thing wouldn't be that unbalancing.)
This is true, but a coup de grace is a full round action. This would be a standard.

It also renders valueless spells like death knell, which are higher level.

RPG Superstar 2009 Top 16, 2012 Top 32

Plognark wrote:

A zero-level standard action coup-de-grace might be a bit too much, especially with sleep spells being flung about at low levels, and arbitrarily making it a full round cast seems weird.

Love the 'un-stabilizing' zero level spell though. Slick idea; nice to see it'll be added!

The coup-de-grace version of the spell only works on stable characters below 0 hp. You couldn't use it on someone who's just sleeping. Or dying but not stable, for that matter. (Edit: And if you prefer to keep it a standard action, just add a saving throw to negate.)

And I still contend that a spell that causes a stable character to become no longer stable is extremely pointless. Why waste an orison on something you can do by kicking the target with your foot?

EDIT:

"Pneumonica wrote:
It also renders valueless spells like death knell, which are higher level.

Well, death knell gives you bonuses to Strength and caster level, so it's considerably better.


Epic Meepo wrote:

The coup-de-grace version of the spell only works on stable characters below 0 hp. You couldn't use it on someone who's just sleeping. Or dying but not stable, for that matter. (Edit: And if you prefer to keep it a standard action, just add a saving throw to negate.)

And I still contend that a spell that causes a stable character to become no longer stable is extremely pointless. Why waste an orison on something you can do by kicking the target with your foot?

In the same vein, my waste a stabilize orison on something you can do by making a Heal check? Also, bleed does have the "Will negates" and "Only usable below 0 hp" caevats.

I personally like the idea of a the higher-spell-less evil cleric trying to take out that last adventurer only to have his efforts thwarted by stabilization after stabilization roll. It makes that Lone Wolf feat from the RotRL Player's Guide all the more useful. YMMV.


I would get rid of the "Will negates" option; it seems excessively bad, even on a spell this minor in power.

If I can kick someone with an easy attack roll*, do 1d3 plus Strength damage, and get them to start bleeding out again as a standard action without any save, this spell (which also requires an attack roll but doesn't do any damage) should not require a save.

* sure, it's not a touch attack, but the unconscious person has an effective Dex of 0, so a -5 AC from that; it shouldn't be too hard to connect (although, for the record, I don't think I have ever kicked an unconscious person in my life).


WelbyBumpus wrote:
I would get rid of the "Will negates" option; it seems excessively bad, even on a spell this minor in power.

I'd keep it in simply because it's the anti-stabilize, which does indeed have a Will save to negate.

Now get high enough level to cast spectral hand and you can reopen those stable foes from a distance. I don't know about you, but I'd much rather have a Will save instead of a 10% chance to stop bleeding out.

Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Roleplaying Game / Alpha Playtest Feedback / Alpha Release 1 / Combat & Magic / Balancing 0-level spells for undead casters All Messageboards
Recent threads in Combat & Magic