PDA

View Full Version : Damage when Harm is used in an unarmed attack.



Indon
2007-10-03, 04:33 PM
Say you have a Cleric who took Superior Unarmed Strike. You cast Harm and deliver it as a standard, not touch, attack, and you hit.

What happens if your target were to make his save, and what happens were your target to fail it?

I ask because Harm HP drop + decent unarmed damage = Dead, is what it seems to me.

Skjaldbakka
2007-10-03, 04:36 PM
You deal unarmed damage, then deal your harm damage. Will save for half the harm damage. As normal.

Emperor Tippy
2007-10-03, 04:38 PM
Why is the unarmed damage dealt first?

Lord Lorac Silvanos
2007-10-03, 04:43 PM
There is no order of application specified so the attacker can choose in which order things happen. (The FAQ has a few examples where the most beneficial order of application is used if none is specified)


If the attack hits, you deal normal damage for your unarmed attack or natural weapon and the spell discharges.

Skjaldbakka
2007-10-03, 04:48 PM
More to the point, why does it matter?

Indon
2007-10-03, 04:50 PM
More to the point, why does it matter?

I had the impression Harm was a lower-level spell than Slay Living. Am I wrong?

Lord Lorac Silvanos
2007-10-03, 04:50 PM
More to the point, why does it matter?

Harm cannot reduce you below 1 HP.

Caduceus
2007-10-03, 04:52 PM
As I recall, the old 3.0 Harm brought the target to 1d4 hp. It would matter in that case, because if the unarmed damage was dealt first, that damage would be irrelevant if lethal. If the unarmed damage was dealt second, and was lethal (in the case of anyone with at least one level of monk), it could possibly bring the target below 0 hp.

Azerian Kelimon
2007-10-03, 04:52 PM
Duelist fans say: Touché!

Seriously, plenty a ways have been tried to cheese off harm. And Indon's tryin' one.

Lord Lorac Silvanos
2007-10-03, 04:52 PM
I had the impression Harm was a lower-level spell than Slay Living. Am I wrong?

Yes, SL is 5th and Harm 6th, for the Cleric at least.

Jasdoif
2007-10-03, 04:55 PM
There is no order of application specified so the attacker can choose in which order things happen. (The FAQ has a few examples where the most beneficial order of application is used if none is specified)You sure? Given that both of the actions are specifically stated together, I would think the order of presentation would dictate the order of occurence; i.e. "If the attack hits, you deal normal damage for your unarmed attack or natural weapon and the spell discharges." would be equivalent "If the attack hits, you deal normal damage for your unarmed attack or natural weapon and then the spell discharges."

That is one of the uses of the word "and", after all.

Azerian Kelimon
2007-10-03, 04:55 PM
Then again, harm is no save. One divine power and a harm with superior unarmed strike later, an opponent who coulda been hard is nearly dead.

Jasdoif
2007-10-03, 04:56 PM
Then again, harm is no save. One divine power and a harm with superior unarmed strike later, an opponent who coulda been hard is nearly dead.Harm allows a Will save for half.

Indon
2007-10-03, 04:56 PM
Then again, harm is no save. One divine power and a harm with superior unarmed strike later, an opponent who coulda been hard is nearly dead.

Harm is Will save, I thought?

It's essentially part of the Inflict line of spells that culminates in Slay Living.

Skjaldbakka
2007-10-03, 04:58 PM
Just strike for nonlethal damage. That way it doesn't matter, because of the way nonlethal damage works.

Kaelik
2007-10-03, 05:04 PM
That is just genius. (unless it's something immune:smallfrown: )

Lord Lorac Silvanos
2007-10-03, 05:08 PM
You sure? Given that both of the actions are specifically stated together, I would think the order of presentation would dictate the order of occurence; i.e. "If the attack hits, you deal normal damage for your unarmed attack or natural weapon and the spell discharges." would be equivalent "If the attack hits, you deal normal damage for your unarmed attack or natural weapon and then the spell discharges."

That is one of the uses of the word "and", after all.

But it does not say "then" and there is nothing to indicate that it could not have been written like this:

"If the attack hits, the spell discharges and you deal normal damage for your unarmed attack or natural weapon."

Without such indication we only have the FAQ.


When do "add-on" effects such as poison occur? For
example, if an assassin delivers a death attack with a
weapon bearing wyvern poison, does the poison take effect
first, thus potentially reducing the target’s Fortitude save
against the death attack?

As a general guideline, whenever the rules don’t stipulate
an order of operations for special effects (such as spells or
special abilities), you should apply them in the order that’s
most beneficial to the “controller” of the effect.
In this case, the assassin is the “controller” of both the
poison and the death attack, so he’d most likely choose for the
poison to take effect first, and then the death attack.

Lord Lorac Silvanos
2007-10-03, 05:11 PM
Just strike for nonlethal damage. That way it doesn't matter, because of the way nonlethal damage works.

Yes and in any case it seems like overkill when the non-lethal while make the victim unconscious anyway.

Lord Lorac Silvanos
2007-10-03, 05:13 PM
It's essentially part of the Inflict line of spells that culminates in Slay Living.

See my earlier post about the level of the spells Harm and Slay Living.

Raolin_Fenix
2007-10-03, 05:55 PM
There's no RAW on this subject that I can see.

One interpretation is that, yes, it deals whichever damage you want it to deal first. Another could be order-of-RAW-presentation, as Jasdoif suggested.

If you want to appeal to logic (as I would) where RAW fails, I would suggest that the harm effect occurs a fraction of a second earlier. Harm is, after all, a touch spell; it happens at the instant your hit touches your target, a fraction of a second before your fist applies damaging pressure, before your claw penetrates the skin, and so forth.

Whichever way you look at it, the results seem the same in this instance.

daggaz
2007-10-03, 06:31 PM
As a DM, I would say that regardless of mechanics, the damage is dealt simultaneously. That said, RAW states that the defender gets to choose which damages to take first.

tainsouvra
2007-10-03, 06:34 PM
That said, RAW states that the defender gets to choose which damages to take first. Where does it say that?

Guy_Whozevl
2007-10-03, 06:37 PM
That is just genius. (unless it's something immune:smallfrown: )

This is easy to circumvent. For undead, substitute heal for harm (which is more useful in general). If the enemy is a construct, I wouldn't waste an action using an unarmed strike. Do something else instead.

Kaelik
2007-10-03, 07:06 PM
This is easy to circumvent. For undead, substitute heal for harm (which is more useful in general). If the enemy is a construct, I wouldn't waste an action using an unarmed strike. Do something else instead.

Right, except that's the point. Using nonlethal works fine with humanoids and harm. But using heal on an undead nonlethal isn't an option, because undead are immune to nonlethal damage.

Shhalahr Windrider
2007-10-03, 07:25 PM
Where does it say that?
See the FAQ entry Lord Silvanos quoted above.

kamikasei
2007-10-03, 07:43 PM
See the FAQ entry Lord Silvanos quoted above.

That specifically says that the "controller of the effect", in the example given the attacker, gets to determine the order of application, not the defender.

Jasdoif
2007-10-03, 07:54 PM
For the confused, here's the other FAQ entry, which says basically the same thing but the example is for effects on the defender:
If a monster has resistance and vulnerability to the same kind of damage (such as fire), which effect is applied first? And when does the saving throw come in?

Always roll a saving throw before applying any effects that would increase or reduce the damage dealt. For example, if a frost giant is struck by a fireball that would deal 35 points of damage, it would roll its Reflex save, then apply its vulnerability to fire after determining how much damage the fireball would normally deal. If the save failed, the frost giant would take 52 points of damage: 35 + one-half of 35 (17.5, rounded down to 17). A successful save would mean the frost giant suffered only 25 points of damage: one-half of 35 rounded down (17), plus one-half of 17 rounded down (8).

If the creature has both resistance and vulnerability to the same kind of damage, apply the resistance (which reduces the damage dealt by the effect) before applying the vulnerability (which increases the damage taken by the creature). For example, imagine our frost giant wore a ring of minor fire resistance (granting resistance to fire 10). If the save failed, the frost giant would take 37 points of fire damage: 35 (fireball) – 10 (resistance to fire 10) = 25, plus one-half of 25 (12.5, rounded down to 12). If the save succeeded, the frost giant would take only 10 points of damage: 17 (half damage from the fireball, rounded down) – 10 (resistance to fire 10) = 7, plus one-half of 7 (3.5, rounded down to 3).

As a general guideline, whenever the rules don’t stipulate an order of operations for special effects (such as spells or special abilities), you should apply them in the order that’s most beneficial to the creature. In the case of damage, this typically means applying any damage-reducing effects first, before applying any effects that would increase damage.

Shas aia Toriia
2007-10-03, 07:55 PM
Doesn't Harm offer a Will to negate, not half?

Jasdoif
2007-10-03, 07:58 PM
Doesn't Harm offer a Will to negate, not half?Nope, it's Will half. See for yourself:


Harm

Necromancy

Level: Clr 6, Destruction 6
Components: V, S
Casting Time: 1 standard action
Range: Touch
Target: Creature touched
Duration: Instantaneous
Saving Throw: Will half; see text
Spell Resistance: Yes

Harm charges a subject with negative energy that deals 10 points of damage per caster level (to a maximum of 150 points at 15th level). If the creature successfully saves, harm deals half this amount, but it cannot reduce the target’s hit points to less than 1.

If used on an undead creature, harm acts like heal.

Arbitrarity
2007-10-03, 08:05 PM
As a general guideline, whenever the rules don’t stipulate
an order of operations for special effects (such as spells or
special abilities), you should apply them in the order that’s
most beneficial to the “controller” of the effect.


As a general guideline, whenever the rules don’t stipulate an order of operations for special effects (such as spells or special abilities), you should apply them in the order that’s most beneficial to the creature.


.......
.......

There's something wrong here. And I think I know what it is.

Jasdoif
2007-10-03, 08:27 PM
.......
.......

There's something wrong here. And I think I know what it is....the controller of the abilities and the creature with the abilities are the same creature?

Arbitrarity
2007-10-03, 08:38 PM
...the controller of the abilities and the creature with the abilities are the same creature?

Incorrect. The creature refers to the recipient of an ability (like a fireball), and therefore, unless they are using an ability on themselves, these two guildlines are mutually exclusive.

Well, as generalities. If you look at the context, there's a difference, but it seems to be rather strange, and involves discerning whether something is an offensive or defensive action. Which can be a pain to differentiate.

Jasdoif
2007-10-03, 08:56 PM
Incorrect. The creature refers to the recipient of an ability (like a fireball), and therefore, unless they are using an ability on themselves, these two guildlines are mutually exclusive.In the defender example, the resistance to fire and the vulnerability to fire are both effects of the defending creature; the defending creature is thus the one in control of the effects and the order in which they apply.

In the attacking example, the poison and death attack are both effects of the attacking creature; the attacking creature is thus the one in control of the effects and the order in which they apply.

What's the discrepancy, again?

Mephisto
2007-10-04, 08:39 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by FAQ
When do "add-on" effects such as poison occur? For
example, if an assassin delivers a death attack with a
weapon bearing wyvern poison, does the poison take effect
first, thus potentially reducing the target’s Fortitude save
against the death attack?

As a general guideline, whenever the rules don’t stipulate
an order of operations for special effects (such as spells or
special abilities), you should apply them in the order that’s
most beneficial to the “controller” of the effect.
In this case, the assassin is the “controller” of both the
poison and the death attack, so he’d most likely choose for the
poison to take effect first, and then the death attack.

That seems wrong, somehow. "Hmm, a knife stab. I think it's poisoned, I'm feeling woozy and OH GOD A KNIFE! Blargh, dead." Then again, the rules for poison are very silly anyway.

Jayabalard
2007-10-04, 09:03 AM
In the defender example, the resistance to fire and the vulnerability to fire are both effects of the defending creature; the defending creature is thus the one in control of the effects and the order in which they apply.

In the attacking example, the poison and death attack are both effects of the attacking creature; the attacking creature is thus the one in control of the effects and the order in which they apply.

What's the discrepancy, again?agree 100%

in both cases, the controller of the effect is the one determining the order.

Indon
2007-10-04, 09:05 AM
See my earlier post about the level of the spells Harm and Slay Living.

Oh, hey, I'd read them as the other way around.

So the only advantage of Harm is that it's Will save/half rather than Will save/negate?

Lord Lorac Silvanos
2007-10-04, 09:16 AM
Oh, hey, I'd read them as the other way around.

So the only advantage of Harm is that it's Will save/half rather than Will save/negate?

The damage taken on a successful save is higher with Harm and there is of course the benefit it has on Undeads...

SL is a fortitude save for 3d6+level in damage on a success, so Harm can be more useful against high fortitude targets.

Indon
2007-10-04, 09:20 AM
Hmm, well, there's that at least.

Keld Denar
2007-10-04, 03:29 PM
You can always follow up with a quickened inflict light wounds. 1d8+5 should be enough to get past that 1 last hp that the opponent probably has left, even on a successful save vs inflict light. (1d8+5 min 6 save for 3, 1-3=-2 therefore disabled). That's a 5th + 6th level 1-2 combo that is as old as the quickened truestrike disintegrate combo. Except its a will save which is generally better than a fort save (more things tend to have higher fort saves than will saves)