No love for the Harm Cleric


Rules Discussion

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

I love the upgraded heal spell and the fact that the 2-action version gets a range and +8 onto the roll per spell level. But what about the Harm spell for us morally questionable Clerics? All we get is the range but no other benefit for the 2-action version. I’m ok with it not being a full 8 points per spell level but maybe 2-4 points per level to help us out a bit? It feels like the two clerics are not equal when presented with the same rules which doesn’t feel right. Even if it’s an “under the hood” type of balance it isn’t presented in a way that makes it feel like it is. Heal and Harm have always been 2 sides of the same coin, which still looks like they wanted to keep it that way with the Healing Hands and Harming Hands feat, but why no added bonus for Harm when Heal gets a huge one? Basically an extra maximized die per spell level.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

Harm also gets +8. When used to heal undead. Just like heal deals only 1d8 when used to harm undead.

The numbers are perfectly balanced. In actual play, you (as a player) usually use heal to heal and harm to harm. In a nation of undead, their roles would be reversed.


I noticed this rule during PFS this weekend. Also made Harm seem a bit too weak of an attacking spell, but I can see why. Maybe a class feat to help increase the effectiveness of using Harm/Heal to attack, like adding an extra +1d8 per level (instead of 8 per level). Though that does feel under powered for such a feat, so would need to be part of something more...


4 people marked this as a favorite.
Uchuujin wrote:
I noticed this rule during PFS this weekend. Also made Harm seem a bit too weak of an attacking spell, but I can see why. Maybe a class feat to help increase the effectiveness of using Harm/Heal to attack, like adding an extra +1d8 per level (instead of 8 per level). Though that does feel under powered for such a feat, so would need to be part of something more...

Harm is only weak when you cast it at range. In melee, it's a single action damage spell with no attack roll and doesn't have the attack trait. A very nice third (or even second) action for a melee cleric.

I'm pretty sure the 2 action version is mostly meant for healing undead minions without putting the caster in harm's way. (Yes, that was intended.)


Agree with blave.
Harm spell is totally balanced.


As an attack cleric you can harm, shield and then attack seems fair enough.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Yeah the thing about harm is that it can't really be compared to 2 action spells. Being able to use it as one action spell opens it up for a lot of combos, and channel smite can create an absurdly high damage single strike. A crit on a channel smite makes me shudder.


Have you tried eHarmony?

(See what I did there?...)


mrspaghetti wrote:

Have you tried eHarmony?

(See what I did there?...)

I did.

Grand Lodge

I'm still just sitting over here disappointed that you lose the +8 heal (for either version) if you push it to the 3 action AoE variant.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Slyme wrote:
I'm still just sitting over here disappointed that you lose the +8 heal (for either version) if you push it to the 3 action AoE variant.

Well, I mean, I think it's pretty cool the designers let us have the 3-action variant without hampering its utility in any way like making us choose to heal or damage, not both at once.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I believe the +8 to healing would be too strong to put it in the AoE variant anyway.

This way it is now the spell is incredibly flexible, imagine if the different action versions of heal/harm were different spells entirely that you'd need to choose from with the limited number of spells slots in 2E.

I kinda prefer how it is now.


3 people marked this as a favorite.

A Harm spell that caused +8 damage when used against living creatures would be overpowered, so it's not that there's no love for Harm Clerics, it's that you can't compare giving a general +8 healing bonus with a general +8 damage bonus.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / Rules Discussion / No love for the Harm Cleric All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.