BoL would be a great scroll for a cleric without the healing domain.At one point I had a bard character with a very high UMD skill, and I pondered Breath of Life from a scroll. Unfortunately, it isn't very useful unless you have the scroll in your hand constantly, or the target happens to be within 5' of you. Taking a move action to retrieve the stored scroll makes it so you won't reach the target in time (unless you also use something like Gloves of Storing).
Having reach on it would certainly help -- but would of course add expense.
(But in my games it's still called cure deadly wounds.)
I saw you mention this before and I house ruled it for my current campaign. It has been spontaneously cast a couple times and they are about halfway through the last chapter. I will definitely keep it that way for future campaigns
Absolutely correct, since it is a touch spell. Likey you could be a round to slow. Or the medium tier rod of reach, and a haversack. Nice mr Spaulding very fast.
Well.... breathe of life is already super powerful as it is. Plus, I've always seen -1 to -Con Mod to be a character on the "brink of death"
Having reach on it would certainly help -- but would of course add expense.
True. I guess I looked at it before the APG came out. I think I opted for Raise Dead + a couple Restorations (although one negative level would persist for a week).
|
Well yes the spell is absolutely great.You don't have to pay for raise 5k and then restoration. Death effects... So great if you can raise your teamate. Fighter remeber to tip your healers. Next time they may just animate you.
This actually speaks to an issue that came up in our session last weekend: does BoL work on someone who died from a death effect, in our case, Phantasmal Killer? In this particular situation it was a moot question because my Cleric couldn't get to the character within the one-round period (he had done some fancy acrobatics to get to an enemy wizard, only to be felled by PK). But the ensuing discussion led to the ruling that it wouldn't have worked anyway, since he died from a death effect and not from damage. It will be good to have a rule going forward, as our GM has warned us that death effects will continue to be an issue in the campaign, especially at our level (our party is currently 11th level and most of us will probably hit 12 in about two sessions).
does BoL work on someone who died from a death effect
No. There is a line in the spell that says:
Creatures slain by death effects cannot be saved by breath of life.
|
|
does BoL work on someone who died from a death effectNo. There is a line in the spell that says:
Creatures slain by death effects cannot be saved by breath of life.
Wow, there it is. Somehow, we had three of us (myself included) debating the issue for a few minutes, and all of us somehow missed that. Thanks for pointing it out.
Death effects have always been a paticulary devasting. After playing for sometime the more I have used them the less I liked them, see the spell Destruction, as a GM nothing makes me feel more guilty then a devastating death effect like Destruction.
Actually..... you guys just pointed out a stipulation that just killed one of my PCs.
She was brought back to life and then hit again afterwards, leaving her with 1 hp away from death.
However, that -5 HP penalty for negative level would have killed her....
I don't really flub rolls for the player, so I will inform the players promptly... thanks alot guys. Forums killed the rogue.....
I really wouldn't go back and retcon a death. Just pretend they got a little bit more lucky on the hp recovery roll, and remember the rule for next tie. Pharasma smiled on her today.
Creative Director
|
BoL would be a great scroll for a cleric without the healing domain.At one point I had a bard character with a very high UMD skill, and I pondered Breath of Life from a scroll. Unfortunately, it isn't very useful unless you have the scroll in your hand constantly, or the target happens to be within 5' of you. Taking a move action to retrieve the stored scroll makes it so you won't reach the target in time (unless you also use something like Gloves of Storing).
Correct; which is another reason I think allowing easier access to the spell via spontaneous casting is a good thing. ;-P
Correct; which is another reason I think allowing easier access to the spell via spontaneous casting is a good thing. ;-P
I think that's a great house rule, and I've already started lobbying our group!
I do like "cure deadly wounds" as a house rule, *replacing* "mass cure light wounds". In all of 3e I cannot recall anyone converting anything to mass CLW.
That it doesn't help against death effects is just fine in my book. The +4 from "death ward" is more than sufficient.
That's... an interesting question.It would be really, really lame if BOL saved you from being dead, and in doing so, killed you with 5 points of damage from negative levels.
Raise dead would have the same problems as it sets you up with 1hp/HD and gives you 2 negative levels...
-James
It's a huge problem with the way negative levels work as a whole now.
You literally lose more from negative levels than you gain from leveling up.
You lose a point of bonus in each skill regardless of if it is trained or not.
You lose more save throw bonus than you gain when you level up (at best you get 1/2 for save throws when you level up -- with negative levels you lose at a rate of 1 per level -- that's twice as fast on losing than gaining).
If you don't have full BAB you lose attack bonus faster than you gain it too.
And if you aren't careful you can actually lose more HP than you gain from leveling up (in the case of rolling for HP or taking average+1 with d6 hit dice).
It's simply ridiculous the amount you lose simply from taking a negative level compared to what you gain by *gaining* a level.
Raise dead would have the same problems as it sets you up with 1hp/HD and gives you 2 negative levels...
The way I read Raise Dead is that when the spell completes, your hit points are set to your HD. No subtracting 10 from that due to negative levels at that point.
It's simply ridiculous the amount you lose simply from taking a negative level compared to what you gain by *gaining* a level.
It was clearly a tradeoff as part of simplifying the system. Negative levels are generally easily resolved, and serve as a short term hindrance more than a permanent crippling effect.
Given that negative levels no longer require the game to grind to a halt as people unbuild their characters, I'm fine with the compromise.
Raise dead would have the same problems as it sets you up with 1hp/HD and gives you 2 negative levels...The way I read Raise Dead is that when the spell completes, your hit points are set to your HD. No subtracting 10 from that due to negative levels at that point.
A raised creature has a number of hit points equal to its current HD. Any ability scores damaged to 0 are raised to 1. Normal poison and normal disease are cured in the process of raising the subject, but magical diseases and curses are not undone. While the spell closes mortal wounds and repairs lethal damage of most kinds, the body of the creature to be raised must be whole. Otherwise, missing parts are still missing when the creature is brought back to life. None of the dead creature's equipment or possessions are affected in any way by this spell.
Example :
Ruby Rogue dies at 1st level. She had 10 CON and 6 HP.
Raise Dead is cast on her.
She loses 2 CON (Dropping her to 8). This drops her HP from 6 to 5. and gives her 1 HP.
Betty Bard dies at 3rd level. She had 10 CON and 9 HP (bad HP rolls).
Riase Dead is cast on her.
She loses 2 levels (Dropping her max HP by 10 points). She is at -1 HP and bleeding to death. She can be stabilized, but not brought to consciousness because her maximum HP is -1. The spell sets her HP to 3 points, and she immediately wakes up, drops to -1 again and passes out. :)
EDIT : You can get the same thing with Breath of Life at 1st level. Say Wilomina Wizard dumped her CON to 8. She has 5 hps. She get's hit with a Breath of Life, and loses one level for 24 hours. She's stuck at 0HP and can't move at all.
She loses 2 levels (Dropping her max HP by 10 points). She is at -1 HP and bleeding to death. She can be stabilized, but not brought to consciousness because her maximum HP is -1. The spell sets her HP to 3 points, and she immediately wakes up, drops to -1 again and passes out. :)EDIT : You can get the same thing with Breath of Life at 1st level. Say Wilomina Wizard dumped her CON to 8. She has 5 hps. She get's hit with a Breath of Life, and loses one level for 24 hours. She's stuck at 0HP and can't move at all.
Yup, looks generally right to me. Only correction is that Betty Bard should end up with 1 HP, not 3 HP, before falling to a cap of -1. It's based on your current HD, and I assume the two negative levels would drop that as well.
Generally speaking, Raise Dead (or Breath of Life) on low level characters is probably a bad idea to begin with, especially without someone to lend them a Belt of Con, or ready to follow it up with a Restoration. :-)
Yup, looks generally right to me. Only correction is that Betty Bard should end up with 1 HP, not 3 HP, before falling to a cap of -1. It's based on your current HD, and I assume the two negative levels would drop that as well.
Nope, she's still a 3HD creature, negative levels don't change that, they just take off hp now. That's assuming I have it right. I could be wrong.
Nope, she's still a 3HD creature, negative levels don't change that, they just take off hp now. That's assuming I have it right. I could be wrong.
Fair enough. I got thrown off by "current HD". Probably a holdover from the 3.5 wording.
Nope, she's still a 3HD creature, negative levels don't change that, they just take off hp now. That's assuming I have it right. I could be wrong.Fair enough. I got thrown off by "current HD". Probably a holdover from the 3.5 wording.
It's pretty confusing to be honest, a lot of it's a mish/mash of 3.5 and new.
I do like "cure deadly wounds" as a house rule [...]
I don't like "cure deadly wounds".
Cure lethal wounds sounds so much better.
Of course, if cure deadly wounds was the name of the spell, there would have to be an inflict deadly wounds for clerics who channel negative energy for balance's sake. And if breath of life has the ability to raise the dead, inflict deadly wounds would have to have some sort of extra oomph too, apart from the 5d8 + caster level inflict. Like if the inflict brought a creature below negative Con, they couldn't be restored to life, along the lines of the assassin ability.
I do like "cure deadly wounds" as a house rule [...]I don't like "cure deadly wounds".
Cure lethal wounds sounds so much better.
And I prefer cure mortal wounds. Well, lethal sounds quite good as well.
Of course, if cure deadly wounds was the name of the spell, there would have to be an inflict deadly wounds for clerics who channel negative energy for balance's sake. And if breath of life has the ability to raise the dead, inflict deadly wounds would have to have some sort of extra oomph too, apart from the 5d8 + caster level inflict. Like if the inflict brought a creature below negative Con, they couldn't be restored to life, along the lines of the assassin ability.
Not necessarily - similar asimmetry happens between heal and harm. The first one heals damage and removes various conditions while the later only inflicts damage.
|
Creative Director
|
Of course, if cure deadly wounds was the name of the spell, there would have to be an inflict deadly wounds for clerics who channel negative energy for balance's sake. And if breath of life has the ability to raise the dead, inflict deadly wounds would have to have some sort of extra oomph too, apart from the 5d8 + caster level inflict. Like if the inflict brought a creature below negative Con, they couldn't be restored to life, along the lines of the assassin ability.
Not necessarily.
Although there IS in my homebrew. Inflict deadly wounds just does 5d8+caster level damage, though; it doesn't do anything particularly special beyond that like how cure deadly wounds does.
Sometimes, breaking symmetrical design is good medicine.
Of course, if cure deadly wounds was the name of the spell, there would have to be an inflict deadly wounds for clerics who channel negative energy for balance's sake. And if breath of life has the ability to raise the dead, inflict deadly wounds would have to have some sort of extra oomph too, apart from the 5d8 + caster level inflict. Like if the inflict brought a creature below negative Con, they couldn't be restored to life, along the lines of the assassin ability.Not necessarily.
Although there IS in my homebrew. Inflict deadly wounds just does 5d8+caster level damage, though; it doesn't do anything particularly special beyond that like how cure deadly wounds does.
Sometimes, breaking symmetrical design is good medicine.
The opposite would be that Inflict Deadly Wounds would have the opportunity to raise an undead from 'death' the same as a living was by cure deadly wounds. In other words, it's a way to bring the dhampir back, or your favorite bloody skeleton, or the vampire cohort.
The opposite would be that Inflict Deadly Wounds would have the opportunity to raise an undead from 'death' the same as a living was by cure deadly wounds. In other words, it's a way to bring the dhampir back, or your favorite bloody skeleton, or the vampire cohort.
While I agree with James about the lack of absolute parity I do like this idea.
Now to make a Sorc/Wizard version that could be contingencied. No reason for divine casting undead to have all the fun.
The opposite would be that Inflict Deadly Wounds would have the opportunity to raise an undead from 'death' the same as a living was by cure deadly wounds. In other words, it's a way to bring the dhampir back, or your favorite bloody skeleton, or the vampire cohort.While I agree with James about the lack of absolute parity I do like this idea.
Now to make a Sorc/Wizard version that could be contingencied. No reason for divine casting undead to have all the fun.
Yeah, there's currently no way to return an undead to unlife. That's always bothered me a bit.
This issue also explains why every king/noble who dies isn't resurrected; they just didn't have enough aristocrat levels to avoid dying from the negative levels :)
Speaking of asymmetry; There isn't a mass harm spell either, sadly.
I thought it was recently dead, not within 1 round. I was thinking more within 1 hour. I used it to bring a NPC back to life. Also the healing it gives is 4d8 plus caster level which is still pretty good. I like using regeneration more though to heal the scarred, lots of roleplaying possibilities there.
Or maybe make inflict deadly/lethal/mortal wounds [death] effect preventing easy revival of opponents killed with it? Or some bonus triggered if the spell kills its victim, like free death knell or small healing to the caster?
It's simply ridiculous the amount you lose simply from taking a negative level compared to what you gain by *gaining* a level.It was clearly a tradeoff as part of simplifying the system. Negative levels are generally easily resolved, and serve as a short term hindrance more than a permanent crippling effect.
Given that negative levels no longer require the game to grind to a halt as people unbuild their characters, I'm fine with the compromise.
I think there is an easy middle ground that could have been taken.
-1 to saves per 2 levels, -3/4 to attack and minus your hit dice average would have been fine. Having the skill penalty only apply to class skills would have been good too.
|
Why don´t we go all the way ?
Cure Deathly Wounds: As cure critical wounds, but 5d8 + level and restore life to someone that died as far as 1 round if the cure brings his hit points over minus constitution.
Cure Future Wounds: As Cure Deathly Wounds, but 6d8 + level and excess hit points over a character hp total turns into temporary hit points for 1 round per level.
Cure Spirit Wounds: As Cure Future Wounds, but 7d8 + level and can restore life to those that died as far as 2 rounds.
Cure Past and Future Wounds: As Cure Spirit Wounds, but 8d8 + level and can restore lost members as the restorarion spell.
Cure All Wounds: As Cure Past and Future Wounds, but 9d8 + level and can remove any condiction that a heal spell can.
Cure Epic Wounds: As Cure All Wounds, but 10d8 + level and target gains damage resistence 10/epic for 1 round per level.
(...)
Cure Unfulfilled Destiny Wounds: As Cure Cataclysmic Wounds, but 20d8 + level and excess healing brings up the target maximum hit points as if he had rolled better in his level up hit points rolls.
|
Developer
|
This actually speaks to an issue that came up in our session last weekend: does BoL work on someone who died from a death effect, in our case, Phantasmal Killer? In this particular situation it was a moot question because my Cleric couldn't get to the character within the one-round period (he had done some fancy acrobatics to get to an enemy wizard, only to be felled by PK). But the ensuing discussion led to the ruling that it wouldn't have worked anyway, since he died from a death effect and not from damage. It will be good to have a rule going forward, as our GM has warned us that death effects will continue to be an issue in the campaign, especially at our level (our party is currently 11th level and most of us will probably hit 12 in about two sessions).
It should be noted that Phantasmal Killer is [fear, mind affecting], but nowhere is death listed. It's not a death effect. It just kills you. Not all save or die are death effects (though all death effects are save or die).
So it would have worked if the cleric had reached him.
Or maybe make inflict deadly/lethal/mortal wounds [death] effect preventing easy revival of opponents killed with it? Or some bonus triggered if the spell kills its victim, like free death knell or small healing to the caster?
Cure deadly wounds doesn't have any bonus effect on undead, so inflict deadly wounds shouldn't have any bonus effect on the living. In my campaign (I just decided), it exists, and has the ability to reanimate an undead that has just been destroyed by being dropped to 0 hp in the last round. It's basically re-binding the negative energy that is dissipating when it stops animating the undead.
|
Creative Director
|
BoL has a few benefits over Raise Dead. As mentioned, it's 'free' with no material cost. Raise Dead and its equivalents cannot be used in combat, because their casting time is over 1 minute. Raise Dead also costs 5000 gp and bestows 2 permanent negative levels. It also means probable lost spell slots and it also cannot bring people back from death effects. It will also not restore much HP to a dead PC, whereas BoL will heal between 20 and 40 life or so.
Raise Dead is an all around completely and unarguably inferior spell to BoL in every way except for the fact that it works after 1 round of death.
And since most dead people are more than 1 round dead, raise dead is a pretty good spell. :-P
Or maybe make inflict deadly/lethal/mortal wounds [death] effect preventing easy revival of opponents killed with it? Or some bonus triggered if the spell kills its victim, like free death knell or small healing to the caster?Cure deadly wounds doesn't have any bonus effect on undead, so inflict deadly wounds shouldn't have any bonus effect on the living. In my campaign (I just decided), it exists, and has the ability to reanimate an undead that has just been destroyed by being dropped to 0 hp in the last round. It's basically re-binding the negative energy that is dissipating when it stops animating the undead.
Yep, I need to add that to my house rule document. Which is now back up to 5 pages (although granted it's at 14 pt font and one page is a giant table for teleportation). And one page is just a modified version of Weapon Groups from Unearthed Arcana.