To begin with... my gaming group and I are coming late to the "alpha/beta party" and have only recently begun to engage the project. I apologize if I am rehashing old content and please feel free to recommend other links if this discussion is overly repetitive. Please take my comments with a grain of salt and know that we're delighted to be participating in the project. Thank you for all your efforts so far.
Does anyone know what changes, if any, have been stated for the Beta1 release? Specifically the differences between Alpha3 and Beta1.
Channel Positive Energy / Mechanic -- A few members of the the group LOVE the idea of "coupling" undead damage with an area-of-effect group heal. While others are concerned of including multiple functions in a single die roll. The jury is still out on whether or not we agree as a group to this mechanic. I for one, enjoy the simplified mechanic and hope that it will continue (in spirit) the way it has been written in the upcoming beta -- perhaps with a few minor tweaks, however.
Channel Positive Energy / Damage -- There has been heated debate about what level of undead should be susceptible to a cleric's "turn ability"... and how different levels of opposing undead should be affected by the ability. While we agree that all undead with lower (or equal) HD to the cleric should receive damage as denoted in the Alpha3, we collectively disagree that higher-level undead should receive half damage should they make their saving throw. We postulate that undead of higher HD than the cleric using the ability should not take any damage whatsoever should they make their save. Auto-damage to higher level undead is not really in keeping with the original flavor of the rule.
Channel Positive Energy / Healing -- There is consensus in the group that having parity in the amount of damage healed and the amount of damage taken by the ability *should not* be equal. While it seems reasonable to leave the damage-dealt numbers just where they are, our playtesting shows that the healing-received should be cut in half.
I know it is not really relative to the specific topic of this thread, but it is still about Turn Undead...
I really don't like the mechanics for Turn Undead in D&D 3rd edition. Too many rolls, too many modifiers, too complicated, too slow.
I prefer to turn around the concept, and instead of the cleric making a roll, the undead are making it.
This is inspired by the variant in Unearthed Arcana.
Technically, it's a saving throw against the turn.
The DC is 10 + cleric level level + Charisma modifier.
In case of a turn resistance it is added to the save.
If the save is failed, the creature is under an effect similar to fear, even if immune to mind effects.
The creatures of HD inferior to half the cleric's level must flee.
The cleric can use this ability 3 times a day, plus his Charisma modifier and the ability affects one creature per level plus his Charisma modifier.
I know it is not really relative to the specific topic of this thread, but it is still about Turn Undead...
I really don't like the mechanics for Turn Undead in D&D 3rd edition. Too many rolls, too many modifiers, too complicated, too slow.
I prefer to turn around the concept, and instead of the cleric making a roll, the undead are making it.
This is inspired by the variant in Unearthed Arcana.Technically, it's a saving throw against the turn.
The DC is 10 + cleric level level + Charisma modifier.
In case of a turn resistance it is added to the save.
If the save is failed, the creature is under an effect similar to fear, even if immune to mind effects.
The creatures of HD inferior to half the cleric's level must flee.
The cleric can use this ability 3 times a day, plus his Charisma modifier and the ability affects one creature per level plus his Charisma modifier.
I *love* that. Simple and clean, although I'd maybe want to limit the maximum HD a cleric can affect, maybe something like Level + Chr modifier as max HD he can affect or something.
|
To begin with... my gaming group and I are coming late to the "alpha/beta party" and have only recently begun to engage the project. I apologize if I am rehashing old content and please feel free to recommend other links if this discussion is overly repetitive. Please take my comments with a grain of salt and know that we're delighted to be participating in the project. Thank you for all your efforts so far.
Welcome to the party!
to try to answer all your questions: first - you can read the PAIZO BLOG (use link on their homepage) for some info as to what is changing in the Beta. Regardless it should be out in a week or two so it wont be long before you curiosity is sated.
That being said - there has been no mention of Paizo's Alpha system of channelling energy being changed or removed. In fact it has received quite a good amount of praise and applause. I would be really surprised to see it changed.
As for your party's consensus of what is fair and not:
I just have to say that I personally agree with rules as written in the Alpha rules. I dont agree with the opinions your table has had in the specific changes being suggested.
I think the healing and harming equal across the board is fair and simple. I think removing damage from undead whose HD are higher is a major wrong approach - if you look at just about ALL undead -their HD are significantly higher than their CR. That means that MOST encounters commensurate with the APL, are going to have higher HD, thus simply removing the feature as a real benefit.
Furthermore in the Creature Advancement rules of the MM, undead are increased 3 HD per 1 CR. So a CR 10 CR undead has like 22 HD.
To argue the "spirit of the rule" concept for higher level undead not taking any damage: they still aren't "turned" if they make their save - so that is still a constant. They'll typically have so many hit points that ever at half-damage they're not suffering much.
Finally, the Turning system of 3.5 is in a word, "Broken." It really isn't a good system. RAW in the PHB, shows that a cleric can turn an undead of +4 HD than his cleric level. In the above example of a CR 10 undead having 22 HD, there is no way that that CR12 creature could ever be turned by even a 17th level cleric - 7 levels HIGHER than the CR.
The turning system is broken - it doesn't work after about 7th or 8th level. I think Paizo has done the right thing with their proposed changes as it now has at least SOME functionality at against those impossible to turn encounters; not to mention the healing that comes with it, that saves clerics from having to burn their spells - and like I said, most share that sentiment, and so I doubt it's changing in Beta (or official next August for that matter.)
Robert
Welcome to the party!to try to answer all your questions: first - you can read the PAIZO BLOG (use link on their homepage) for some info as to what is changing in the Beta. Regardless it should be out in a week or two so it wont be long before you curiosity is sated.
That being said - there has been no mention of Paizo's Alpha system of channelling energy being changed or removed. In fact it has received quite a good amount of praise and applause. I would be really surprised to see it changed.
As for your party's consensus of what is fair and not:
I just have to say that I personally agree with rules as written in the Alpha rules. I dont agree with the opinions your table has had in the specific changes being suggested.
I think the healing and harming equal across the board is fair and simple. I think removing damage from undead whose HD are higher is a major wrong approach - if you look at just about ALL undead -their HD are significantly higher than their CR. That means that MOST encounters commensurate with the APL, are going to have higher HD, thus simply removing the feature as a real benefit.
Furthermore in the Creature Advancement rules of the MM, undead are increased 3 HD per 1 CR. So a CR 10 CR undead has like 22 HD.
To argue the "spirit of the rule" concept for higher level undead not taking any damage: they still aren't "turned" if they make their save - so that is still a constant. They'll typically have so many hit points that ever at half-damage they're not suffering much.
Finally, the Turning system of 3.5 is in a...
Thank you for your feedback, Robert! While on many other game publisher forums I'd be flamed for stating my *opinion*... I have received nothing but reasonable debate from the Paizo community. Thank you again for speaking clearly about your thoughts on the rule and providing me with an update about what others on the boards are thinking. Regardless of how it pans out in Beta, I'm hooked with the rules updates in general and will be doing my best to incorporate them all into my gaming group.
Sincerely,
Jim
|
|
Thank you for your feedback, Robert! While on many other game publisher forums I'd be flamed for stating my *opinion*... I have received nothing but reasonable debate from the Paizo community. Thank you again for speaking clearly about your thoughts on the rule and providing me with an update about what others on the boards are thinking. Regardless of how it pans out in Beta, I'm hooked with the rules...
You're welcome, completely. Funny that I made a comment about the Turning and the Undead HD vs CR comment today.
I was just reading the next portion of the Shackled City Adventure Path I'm running to prepare for the weekend's game.
The final battle in this section has (among other things) 5 Monster Zombie Grey Renders. They are CR 6. They have 20 HD! and 130 hit points!!! They are just the meat-shields for the high-cleric, and his cohorts, a devil and a powerful wraith.
The PCs are level 12. Even as meatshields, these things couldn't possibly be turned by the party cleric even if she rolled a 20!!!
Using PF's concept of damage based off channeling, a 12th level cleric (actually she's only 10th with 2 levels fighter) would do 6d6 points of damage - (about 22 or so) and only half that much if they save. (And considering the temple is under an Unhallow spell - making the undead harder to turn does make it a good possibility) 11 points of damage (vs 0 as you were proposing) is not unbalancing, and it'll still take ALOT of those turn attempts to take a chunk out of just those meat shields.
For the record, if the creature was advanced to be CR challenge to the party CR13 as a solo creature, the HD and hps would be more than doubled! (41 HD!)
All of this illustrates how IMO the turning system has been broken for quite some time, and how I do feel that making it a save for 0 dmg vs half is not at all necessary.
As a side note; no I don't flame - and most here dont. Paizo is much more lax on the leash around here than I've seen on other message forums related to these games (EnWorld and WotC comes to mind), but with that lax mentality, most of us dont bite that hand that feeds us so we can continue to enjoy the freedoms.
By the way - while you're here - take a look around - there's a lot of great threads here with a lot of good ideas and info for making the game better. Well better is relative - but their are a lot of good ideas by a lot of creative minds and talented DMs and players on here.
Robert
er does this mean that there is no turning any more, just channel energy? What hit dice can an evil cleric persuade to join him?
|
Finally, the Turning system of 3.5 is in a...
Now playing PFS Organized play with 3.5 turning rules, and so far these rules seems well balanced at least at Tier 1-2.
SPOILER
*
*
*
*
*
*
There are defenitely LOTS of undeads in PFS Scenarios 1 to 6, and the 3.5 turning rules were put to a great test.
*
*
*
*
ANOTHER SPOILER
*
*
*
*
I LOVE the idea of Turning undead instead of just channeling energy cause when other party members are chasing the Turned creatures, I get a few rounds to complete some actions that other party members must be less aware of (secret mission).