viker's page

2 posts. No reviews. No lists. No wishlists.


RSS


anthonydido wrote:

I disagree. Cure spells are channeled positive energy. It says so in the spell description:

Cure Light Wounds wrote:
When laying your hand upon a living creature, you channel positive energy that cures 1d8 points of damage + 1 point per caster level (maximum +5). Since undead are powered by negative energy, this spell deals damage to them instead of curing their wounds. An undead creature can apply spell resistance, and can attempt a Will save to take half damage.
So cure spells would do full damage or half if they make the save.

I found this.

Q: Does positive energy from Channel Energy only cause half damage to Incorporeal undead?

A: (Jason Bulmahn 12/1/09) As for this particular issue, there is nothing in the rules exempting channel energy from being reduced by the incorporeal UMR (universal monster rule). Using the rules as written, this means that it is reduced. That said it probably should not be, but that is a matter I will take up when we get to errata for that book.

Update: The Universal Monster Rules for Incorporeal creatures updated the rules to reflect that Channel Energy is NOT reduced by 50%.

He seems to be referencing the Channel Energy ability, not the positive energy from CLW. Does this change anything?


So I'm DMing a party that's fighting a wraith. It's an incorporeal creature, so I've been ruling that all their magic attacks (except for Force Spells and Channel Energy) do 50% damage as stated in the Incorporeal Creature description.

We're playing on Roll20, and one of my players was at a coffee shop when a Regional Pathfinder Society Manager wanders by and informs him that the cure light wounds spells that I've been ruling as doing half-damage should be doing full damage.

So we find a few conflicting discussions. This one says that healing spells don't do their full damage. This one cites the Errata for Bestiary I and says they do.

I checked the errata and couldn't find the entry. I'm pretty sure the PF Society manager would be correct, but I can't find the source. Can anyone help clear this up? It seems like such a simple thing that no one can agree on!