Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
After playing with PRPG #2 and #3 Channel Positive, I have comments.
These are based on a Cleric 12th level with CHA 0 (baseline cleric unoptimized.)
I like the PRPG #3 change (removing the resist energy), but I believe there needs to be more work. I think Spirit Shaman's Chastise Spirits is better balanced (1d6/level) but I agree that healing needs to be less. So I recommend my change of 1d6/level damage and 1d6/2 levels healing.
ECL 12 Cleric vs Shadow (CR 8 Turn Resist 2)
PRPG #2 deals 8.65 avg for 6.7 turns to kill.
PRPG #3 deals 13.65 avg for 4.2 turns to kill.
My Version deals 27.3 avg for 2.1 turns to kill.
ECL 12 Cleric vs Dread Wraith (CR 11)
PRPG #2 and #3 deals 11.0 avg for 9.4 turns to kill.
My Version deals 22.0 avg for 4.7 turns to kill.
ECL 12 Cleric vs Dread Wraith (CR 11)
PRPG #2 and #3 deals 11.0 avg for 9.4 turns to kill.
My Version deals 22.0 avg for 4.7 turns to kill.
Comments?
Comments?
Due to the combined effect a channeling can do (healing, damaging, and either fleeing or controlling) I don't believe the damage should be increased. The turn effect on undead is more for disruption effect the fleeing causes than the damage.
There's already complaints about channeling negative energy for 1d6 damage per 2 levels - at 1d6 per level it would be too good.
|
I haven't actually play the game yet (still reading the Alpha3) but have read the write-up on Chanelling energy. I must say that either I am missing something or there is a major "typo".
Here is my problem - A group of adventurers are suprised by an evil necromantic cleric and his minions (both undead and deprived living). The party is surrounded and are taking a beating. The party cleric channels positive energy harming the undead all around him, as well as his party, but unfortunately also the evil minions. The necromancer decides to channel evil energy healing up his remaining undead, but watches his living minions drop dead on the spot (not that he minds the extra bodies, but.....)
Am I really miss reading the way channeling energy works? I would think that the cleric could choose which living gets healed, but that is not how it is written.
Arda
Actually, Arda, Channel Positive Energy only harms unliving creatures (Undead), and heal living creatures (including your living enemies, if caught within the area).
The reverse is true of Channel negative Energy. Harming the living and healing the unliving.
Due to the combined effect a channeling can do (healing, damaging, and either fleeing or controlling) I don't believe the damage should be increased. The turn effect on undead is more for disruption effect the fleeing causes than the damage.
There's already complaints about channeling negative energy for 1d6 damage per 2 levels - at 1d6 per level it would be too good.
I'm in agreement with Eric here. With everything this burst can do now. I thin it could be argued to be one of the BEST abilities in PF atm.
|
|
Actually, Arda, Channel Positive Energy only harms unliving creatures (Undead), and heal living creatures (including your living enemies, if caught within the area).
The reverse is true of Channel negative Energy. Harming the living and healing the unliving.
Actually Pathos, the line should have read "as well as HEALING his party" :( . I guess that is the result of being up waaaay too late and trying to type.
Am I really the only one who sees a problem with either healing your enemies or killing your allies depending on your alignment?
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
I'm in agreement with Eric here. With everything this burst can do now. I thin it could be argued to be one of the BEST abilities in PF atm.
Having DM'd several games with a 12th level cleric using Channel Positive, I can assure you that it is not the best thing she can do with her standard action if left as is. The amount of damage done in PRPG #2 is so little that she would often deal zero (0) damage. The amount done in PRPG #3 is still low enough to be largely ineffectual.
Have you played as a Cleric in a real game using PRPG #3? Or is it just your opinion based on the stats of the ability?
In short, channel as it stands now is more useful for its healing effect than for the damage or other effects.
I think the rules makes sense as written. Furthermore, there is a feat to allow you to 'miss' targets with your channelling. Kind of a shape meta-magic feat.
But it might be a reasonable house rule to only have your team members healed. Or better yet, make it depend on what holy symbol your charater wears. So if a cleric of Pelor channels positive energy, it only positively affects people wearing the symbol of Pelor. That will force party unit. There are no Atheists in a foxhole!
It seems to be that if you compare the effect of Turning/Channeling from 3.5 to Pathfinder for a creature that is close to the same CR as the cleric, the chance of 'turning' them has remained about the same. Then Healing/Damaging effect has been added for a little more oomph.
The major discrepancy comes in with creatures below the cleric's CR. The damage is still a small effect, but the 'turn' is quite a bit lower chance. It essentially scales at 1/2 cleric/undead level (DC of the save), instead of 3 times cleric level (the effect of cleric level on the Charisma check to turn).
One large counter to that, in addition to the healing, is that Channel Energy damages *all* undead in the area, and also has a chance of 'turn'ing leader undead (whereas the lower HD undead would be turned before).
I would suggest an adjustment to the save based on cleric level vs. CR or HD, but CR shouldn't factor into player actions, and HD can go quite high on undead.
I would enjoy (not necessarily recommend, but enjoy) turning the effect into d8's, instead of d6's. Much more clericy, but it doesn't really solve the lower CR issues.
|
Am I really the only one who sees a problem with either healing your enemies or killing your allies depending on your alignment?
No, a lot of people have commented on this since Alpha #1. Charisma has suddenly become much more important to Clerics and the "Selective Channeling" feat is almost a requirement.
-- Dennis
|
|
Having DM'd several games with a 12th level cleric using Channel Positive, I can assure you that it is not the best thing she can do with her standard action if left as is.
I'm not sure that channelling should be a clerics most powerful ability in any given round, even against undead. But before I talk about that, what is the CHA of your cleric? That has a big effect on the effectiveness of channelling. Also, are you using PRPG+Core or are you using non-core material? Your 12th level cleric has 5th and 6th level spells to choose from. 5d6 and forcing a will save or flee is pretty good for a 3-7x/ day ability. Channelling should not be as powerful as a 5th level spell.
-- Dennis
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
Having DM'd several games with a 12th level cleric using Channel Positive, I can assure you that it is not the best thing she can do with her standard action if left as is.I'm not sure that channelling should be a clerics most powerful ability in any given round, even against undead. But before I talk about that, what is the CHA of your cleric? That has a big effect on the effectiveness of channelling. Also, are you using PRPG+Core or are you using non-core material? Your 12th level cleric has 5th and 6th level spells to choose from. 5d6 and forcing a will save or flee is pretty good for a 3-7x/ day ability. Channelling should not be as powerful as a 5th level spell.
-- Dennis
It should be the best, until she runs out of turns. At least in my opinion.
As stated in the OP, she had CHA 10. She didn't have enough good stats to make CHA higher.
PRGP for Core then everything WotC made additional (so a lot of non core material.) She was a Fire Elf Cleric 12th.
Yes, she had 5th+ spells. My point was 6d6 save for half really means 3d6 since they almost can't fail their save with +9 to +14 vs a DC 16.
As for your Channeling <= 5th level spell. I respectfully disagree. Channeling should be powerful vs undead, as it is a limited daily ability and is the cleric's main contribution to undead battles.