so does mystic healing harm undead?


Rules Questions


Just what the title asks. I am wondering if i could make my character go into a ballistic religious healing thing. where he tackles an undead and just channals heal after heal into the walking corpse until its really dead. Thats all.

Sorry could not think of the right word for what priests do to possessed people to free them from a demon control.


No. Only healer connection channeling, modified by a feat, does that.


Thats an area effect and i thought that positive energy was an anathema to the undead which healing spells are chuck full of. Heck the game goes out of its way to give the pc a way to heal the undead using negative energy.


It takes a feat, a resolve point, a spell slot and a full round action to use that area effect ability. And its the only reason i have not picked it up. To darn costly.


ghostunderasheet wrote:
It takes a feat, a resolve point, a spell slot and a full round action to use that area effect ability. And its the only reason i have not picked it up. To darn costly.

Yup. In addition Healing Connection, while still a fantastic source of HP healing, is living in a game where HP damage is more rare. So the choice of connection needed to even be allowed to pay the exorbitant cost is not as much of a must-pick choice.


Does positive energy healing harm undead if used on them? Is magic healing positive energy?

Not asking about harm undead. I knew about that already. There is a will save and all.


The Mystic Cure spell does not say that it harms undead.

In fact the targeting rule says that it can only target living creatures (though Mass Mystic Cure doesn't have that restriction). So not only does it not harm undead, you can't target undead with it.

Serum of Healing also only restores HP, never harms; and also explicitly calls out that it only heals living creatures.


Oh, and the Mystic class ability Healing Touch also doesn't have any provisions for harming anybody.

It also doesn't have any restrictions on use for living creatures only. The only requirement is that the target is an ally.

So you could heal an undead ally with it. Probably constructs too.


Okay. And thank you.


Coming from D&D 3.5 I had to facepalm at a couple of these too.

It seems that it was deliberate to remove having healing spells and abilities harm undead. They did add back in that option with the Harm Undead feat for people who need it for their character. Although those characters had better be Mystics.

Sovereign Court

Starfinder isn't Pathfinder.

Undead aren't automatically evil anymore. (Though many are, probably.)
Alignment isn't a big theme of the game anymore. All-caps, fire and brimstone EVIL is pretty rare among non-outsiders, evil undead are probably more like lawyers and used car salesmen evil.
Undead are citizens too.
Healing doesn't hurt undead anymore.


Ascalaphus wrote:
Healing doesn't hurt undead anymore.

Not beyond the offense they might take that you still think of them like that. lol


Ascalaphus wrote:
Undead aren't automatically evil anymore.

That is undead propaganda. All Undead are all evil. if you must Feast on the living you are evil with a capital E. And preaching such is heresy. For it leads impressionable mortals into damnation.


Pathfinder Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

How many undead don't actually need to feat on the living?

Not that I disagree that the majority of undead are evil, and that being undead acts as a serious force encouraging one to be evil. But even back in Pathfinder, it was totally possible to be a non-evil undead. Just really, really hard.

This is also 100% irrelevant to the issue of "healing and undead", because healing has nothing to do with morality. Presumably healing spells and effects don't hurt undead by default because of changes in the design of standard healing spells.


Wraiths and shadows devour live force or levels, zombies ghouls or rotting walking dead and their ilk eat the flesh of mortals dead or alive, ghosts live of emotions, skeletons must free their trapped brethren, vampires feed off the blood of the living and lichs live off the pain and misery they inflict on the living.

Some do not physically eat mortals but they are like leaches and feed one way or another off of the living.

I do not know about the cyberneticly animated undead but that's just not right. The other used to be connected to negative energy and healing used to be channeled positive energy. How it was explained to me was it was like how matter and antimatter react with each other they annihilate each other and the greater mass is what is left.

There are risks you got to get close enough to an undead and touch them to cast the spell it hurts them and your right there for them to hit you back. possably an AO with casting the spell.


Lots of undead don’t feed on anything at all. Zombies, skeletons, liches, etc.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
AtlasSniperman wrote:
Ascalaphus wrote:
Healing doesn't hurt undead anymore.
Not beyond the offense they might take that you still think of them like that. lol

the living impaired?


^Living impaired might describe an awful lot of us . . . I know that I for one have no life . . . .


On Eox they use clone vats to create the required food without harming anybody. But they say it tastes Bland compared to traditional sources...

Community / Forums / Starfinder / Rules Questions / so does mystic healing harm undead? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Rules Questions