Gregory "Stonebeard" McArrin's page

I'm just not so sure about making Channeling so much better as a finishing move (does in the last of their hitpoints) than before that (just damage).

I'm not entirely opposed, but I don't see this as the default answer for vampires.

I'm not trying to make it better. In fact I'm not changing it at all. My group is just trying to figure out if "crumbles to dust and is destroyed" is flavor text or not. If it is, that's fine.

If it's not flavor text though, then we aren't making it better so much as using it as it was intended to be used. If it's not flavor text then we(and I'm assuming other groups as well) haven't been using channel positive energy correctly, nor to it's full potential. I mean, the only reason why the question came up was because after reading the text we couldn't tell. And being that there used to be a way with Turn in 3.0 and 3.5 to outright destroy the undead that your turning, but it's not really stated in Pathfinder except for that one line.

As for a default answer for Vampires, there isn't one, nor will there ever be. In order to kill a vampire with Channel, the cleric would have to get lucky in hitting it at the right time. Like I said before, my group has fought a few vamps so far (read 7+) and none of those were killed by channel. I know that the odds are there, but they aren't that good when you consider that your working with at least 2 other people.

If it fails the second save, it goes out in a Lost Boys bampf of smoke.

NOOOOOO, lol. Bamfs of smoke don't leave much in the way of loot lol

i wouldn't give any undead any kind of protection from the holy

I agree. Giving undead any kind of protection from positive energy just doesn't make any sense. The only thing that the should get is a plus to saves due to turn resistance, which is already in the rule set.

Any one else know if that line is just flavor text or if it's written as intended? Nothing against you Montalve, but I'm trying to get as many opinions as possible. Even better would be if one of the designers could let us know.

It would be great if Paizo could include a "Changes" extra page so those that have been following previous editions get faster access to all the changes. =)

God, wouldn't that be nice?

I might give true vampires a second save versus destruction, but not vampire spawn

You mean like if they took full damage on a positive energy channel and it was enough to drop them below 0 they would get a 2nd save to try and make it 1/2 damage instead? Or after they drop below 0 they would have to make another save at the same DC (minus turn resistance I would think since it's no longer vs the channeling, but against destruction) or be destroyed?

why half? for the dice of do your gam gives them also a saving throw?

Yeah, they get a Will save. DC=10+1/2 cleric's level + CHA mod. They have a pretty decent will save, so they usually make it.

i would say the vampire crumble to dust, but its weird vampire that would be destroeyd by just a single Turn Undead (or positive channeling)

I thought it was a little odd too. However, I don't really think that we have killed any vampires (and we have fought a lot so far) with channel, not that I can remember off the top of my head anyway. Sure it has dealt out damage to them, but 19 times out of 20 they only end up taking half damage from it.

Recently a question came up in my group as to whether it is flavor text when it states:

Mostly this question came up because we are fighting quite a few vampires and vampire spawn at the current time. We came to the conclusion that even though they turn into gas when they hit 0 hit points, they would still take the rest of the damage even though it doesn't really effect them.

Some of us think that it was written as intended to off-set the ability to destroy undead outright like you could in 3.5. The other people though think that it's just flavor text and should be taken as such.

Any ideas?

Very good point. That is a pretty big leap, from 20% versus ranged to 50% on everything.

It's not really that big of a leap when you consider that you get that 50% ONLY if you do a double move or a withdraw action for that round. As opposed to just moving more than 5 feet for the 20% vs ranged.