[Channel Positive Energy] Flavor text or written as it is intended to work?


General Discussion (Prerelease)


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

] Undead who take damage greater than thier hit points crumble to dust and are destroyed.[/quote wrote:

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?

Liberty's Edge

Gregory 'Stonebeard' McArrin wrote:

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?

does the sun burn vampires? or holy damage?

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)

even in 3.5 if the turn undead was too much powerful they DID crumble to dust

SRD 3.5 wrote:

Destroying Undead

If you have twice as many levels (or more) as the undead have Hit Dice, you destroy any that you would normally turn.

in this case if the positive channeling is too powerful they will just die burned by the divinity


Montalve wrote:
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.

Liberty's Edge

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

but eys, if you don't take them to 0 with divine power and hurt them with other weapons i would send them away


Montalve wrote:
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.


Vampires also get their turn resistance as a bonus to their channel energy saves in Beta, but no positive energy resistance.

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


tergiver wrote:
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?


Gregory 'Stonebeard' McArrin wrote:
tergiver wrote:
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?

It fits with the classic vampire story though. True faith has always been the bane of the vampire, holy water would do tremendous damage to one if they were submersed in it and the channeling positive energy is similar to submersing the vampire in something holy, at least for a short time. I would say yes though that ole fang face would be destroyed now the really powerful vamps in some D&D adventures and the like have had ways of getting around this whether it be via a magic item or a feat or whatever. I like the idea of a feat as opposed to a magic item, the old powerful vamp has fought against priests using positive energy so many times that he has built up a resistance to it and while he is still repulsed by it and it causes him great pain and discomfort he can fight through it though with some penalties to all actions or something like that, maybe even the really really powerful vamps can be given the opportunity to buy off even this weakness with a more powerful feat or something, giving you the truly powerful vamp that just marches into the presence of the cleric , strides right through his turning attempt, grabs him by the throat and casts him aside. Perhaps to borrow a term from 4e the old powerful vamps body exudes an aura of necrotic (negative) energy that serves to protect him against all but the most powerful of positive energy effects. He has embraced his identity as one of the "damned" so completely that he no longer strives against it at all and even the gods are somewhat repulsed by his presence. Just some thoughts.

Charles


I like that idea that the undead have so embraced their undeadness they become even more resistent to the positive energies of Clerics and Paladins. Sure this could be bonus to saves but I am more thinking of Damage Resistence versus Channel Energy. Only an uber Vamp or undead Lich or the like or maybe an undead Cleric. Perhaps with an undead Cleric it can use it's own power to counter the Positive energy as a free action if it has this "feat" to allow that. I like that idea! I think I'll use it on my party soon.

Liberty's Edge

zwyt wrote:
It fits with the classic vampire story though. True faith has always been the bane of the vampire, holy water would do tremendous damage to one if they were submersed in it and the channeling positive energy is similar to submersing the vampire in something holy, at least for a short time. I would say yes though that ole fang face would be destroyed now the really powerful vamps in some D&D adventures and the like have had ways of getting around this whether it be via a magic item or a feat or whatever. I like the idea of a feat as opposed to a magic item, the old powerful vamp has fought against priests using positive energy so many times that he has built up a resistance to it and while he is still repulsed by it and it causes him great pain and discomfort he can fight through it though with some penalties to all actions or something like that, maybe even the really really powerful vamps can be given the opportunity to buy off even this weakness with a more powerful feat or something, giving you the truly powerful vamp that just marches into the presence of the cleric , strides right through his turning attempt, grabs him by the throat and casts him aside. Perhaps to borrow a term from 4e the old powerful vamps body exudes an aura of necrotic (negative) energy that serves to protect him against all but the most powerful of positive energy effects. He has embraced his identity as one of the "damned" so completely that he no longer strives against it at all and even the gods are somewhat...

sounds nice... but old vampires woudl shrug a lot of damage... but i say a maximum damage from a 20 level cleric goes through 11d6 FTW... obviously it could be between 11 and 66 daamge, a few vamoireshave more than this

i won't give ampires below 0 points a 2nd save... they get burn like if they were in the sun.

Liberty's Edge

Odonna Mirrin wrote:
I like that idea that the undead have so embraced their undeadness they become even more resistent to the positive energies of Clerics and Paladins. Sure this could be bonus to saves but I am more thinking of Damage Resistence versus Channel Energy. Only an uber Vamp or undead Lich or the like or maybe an undead Cleric. Perhaps with an undead Cleric it can use it's own power to counter the Positive energy as a free action if it has this "feat" to allow that. I like that idea! I think I'll use it on my party soon.

vampiresandother undeadsa already haveturn resistance

but by the contrary embrassingevenmore the negative energy wouldmake them more vulnerable to positive energy

i wouldn't give any undead any kind of protection from the holy, THEY ARE ALREADY TOO DIFFICULT TO KILL! (if not, you aredoing soemthing wrong)

the other idea, the aprt of the evil cleric using hisown energy to counter the good priest and viceversa... i like it... evenwithout a feat


Montalve wrote:
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.


Gregory 'Stonebeard' McArrin wrote:
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?

Yes, second save against destruction (and I'd make it the same save both times, if nothing else to make the math easier). If the vampire makes the second save, it's reduced to zero hit points and floats off in gaseous form. If it fails the second save, it goes out in a Lost Boys bampf of smoke.


tergiver wrote:
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


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

See.. I would have figured they crumbled to dust, turn to a puff of smoke, and make their gaseous form way back to their coffin.

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.


Majuba wrote:

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.


Since channelled energy is damage, I'd go with the vampire turning gaseous or the lich retreating to their phylactery upon reaching 0 hp. Destroying them outright is not very fun, especially considering that the lich's phylactery hasn't been destroyed.

Liberty's Edge

Arakhor wrote:
Since channelled energy is damage, I'd go with the vampire turning gaseous or the lich retreating to their phylactery upon reaching 0 hp. Destroying them outright is not very fun, especially considering that the lich's phylactery hasn't been destroyed.

lich are different

they need to destroy the philactery first, any hunter of the dead worth her salt knows that :P

but otherwise for the vampire, unless he has some contingency spell, its quite real, its like being in the sun.

i suppose you are a DM and because of that you think its not fun... then plan the vampires as inteligent ceratures, one of them will try to stay as far away from the cleric as he can... or he will take down the cleric first.


Throw in my vote for "damage is damage". I think (without authority) that they just forgot about the Lich and Vamp when they wrote that little sentence, and that they should be excluded from it.

Otherwise destroying a vamp becomes *very* easy. When you get 'em low, blow a channel and they die. that's just too simple. Same with Lich.

-S

Dark Archive Owner - Johnny Scott Comics and Games

That's right. We Liches are too tough to be taken out like punks by channelled Positive energy.

As for the OP's question, I don't believe that is flavor text. The way it's worded makes me think it's an actual result of using the ability. In other words, if you eclipse the undead creatures hit point total with your channel, he goes <poof>.

Liberty's Edge

then they become myst when hit by the sun?

they are full of positive energy which disrupts their connection to the negative plane... i say vampire just turn to dust and die...

in the side of the Lich... their bodies turn to dust... their soul escape to the item that holds their soul... that is what it works for... of course if a good cleric founds it... its is pretty easy to destroy... then anything that brings down the Lich would kill him...

just remember nor Liches nor Vampires likes to fight directly, that is why they have minions... if the cleric arrvies with enought power to use again and again positive channeling to get them... they deserve it.

also remember...nor Lichs nor Vampiresshow how damaged they are... there are dead, they don't react to damage... unless its holy...

if your players know the vamprie is so damaged that its time to kill him with a Positive Channeling... then you are giving away one of the benefits of being undead... and telling them how many hps he has...

Larry Lichman wrote:
That's right. We Liches are too tough to be taken out like punks by channelled Positive energy.

yeah... here we just need to find a little object that can't be too far away... then we can kill the lich like any other [sorcerous] skeleton :P


Vampires are especially vulnerable to sunlight; positive energy only damages them. Sunlight destroys them; damage (positive or otherwise) mystifies them, if you'll pardon the pun.

As for phylacteries, they only need to be on the same world/plane/dimension of existence, as the lich's spirit will instantly recall there. There has to be a corpse within 60 feet to get back up again, true enough, but their recall is global/planar/what-have-you.


Vampires always had few hit point, comparet to their CR, because they where so difficult to damage and kill.

If vampires now dies like flies against clerics ... this means that their CR should be lowered, lowered a lot ...

Dark Archive Owner - Johnny Scott Comics and Games

Arakhor wrote:

Vampires are especially vulnerable to sunlight; positive energy only damages them. Sunlight destroys them; damage (positive or otherwise) mystifies them, if you'll pardon the pun.

As for phylacteries, they only need to be on the same world/plane/dimension of existence, as the lich's spirit will instantly recall there. There has to be a corpse within 60 feet to get back up again, true enough, but their recall is global/planar/what-have-you.

That's right. You'll never find my phylactery, Montalve.

"Sorcerous skeleton" my foot...

BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!

Liberty's Edge

Larry Lichman wrote:
Arakhor wrote:

Vampires are especially vulnerable to sunlight; positive energy only damages them. Sunlight destroys them; damage (positive or otherwise) mystifies them, if you'll pardon the pun.

As for phylacteries, they only need to be on the same world/plane/dimension of existence, as the lich's spirit will instantly recall there. There has to be a corpse within 60 feet to get back up again, true enough, but their recall is global/planar/what-have-you.

That's right. You'll never find my phylactery, Montalve.

"Sorcerous skeleton" my foot...

BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!

damn i need to do a deep research before using the "Locate Object" spell

sometimes i hate they nerfed it :P


I've been a fan of liches ever since I read the "Arcane Formula for a Lich" from the original Lords of Darkness. I've been a fan of vampires ever since van Richten's Guide to Vampires.

Grand Lodge

I have no problem letting a cleric turn a lich to dust. A few days later the lich comes back and kicks that cleric's ass!

Vampires... tough call. I'd say that if the channel positive energy manages to drop them to a negative number then they are dust. If it hits exactly 0, then the vampire turns to smoke and comes back later to kick the cleric's ass.

Though I must admit I LOVE the idea of an undead cleric using its own channel negative energy as a held action to counter a cleric's channel positive energy. That would be a WTF moment if ever I saw one. It wouldn't be able to do that many times at all. Maybe once in a fight. Holding the action opens it up to all kinds of other attacks.

But that one time would make the party wake up...

I must throw that in somewhere in RotRL... a side trek or something.

Liberty's Edge

Krome wrote:
Vampires... tough call. I'd say that if the channel positive energy manages to drop them to a negative number then they are dust. If it hits exactly 0, then the vampire turns to smoke and comes back later to kick the cleric's ass.

Pre-PS: i hate when my post are erased!!!!!!

ok... where i was... yes

oh my i DO love this scene!

don't get me wrong people, i love undead... my players could testify that sometimes i abuse of them on my campaigns...

about the Lich, i rememberit from the 2nd edition monster compendium... and it was near invinsible... all powerful, and at least a level 18 caster...he killed himself to become closer to knowledge... everything of the lich was great...
now... its a cheap template atainable at level 12... ok.. if you get cheap liches ingame you deserve them to die cheaply... ah damn... ok first we need to find the philactery... butif the DM want the players to have any posibility to win against the Lich he will put it ina notso difficult place to find... if he just want his "awesome" monster to kill them... believe me... no cleric possitive channel will change this.

Vampires... don'tlet mebegin with this... i love vampires, always have, always will... and for about 6 years i storytelled or played vampire: the masquerade almost exclusively... my favorite setting is Ravenloft and Van Richten's Guide to Vampires only enhance this...

eventhen i have not confronted my players a lot vs vampires... why not? because i know how to sue them... and its going to be a TPK... a Vampire is smart and powerful and would plan ahead of time, willhave contingency plans for his contingency plans... that is how a vampire is played... he goes after them one by one, seduces one, converts another, murder the next... and watches as the rest do something...

to kill a vampire you need to researh his background, get him/her withthe pants down and kill him/her before the f%@%er knows you even exist... otherwise... you are a gonner... period.

*sight* if you have a cheap vampire going all out vs the players, and they pummel him down enoughand you let them know you he is close to "dying" and becoming smoke... then its not surprise that the cleirc uses his possitie channeling and makes him nothing but ashes...

DM that use cheap enemy encounters, deserve their "monsters" to be killed cheaply and don't have the right to complain about it.

Dark Archive Owner - Johnny Scott Comics and Games

Vampires may be cheap, but us liches are never cheap!

(Montalve, I agree 100% with your post. It really does come down to how the DM presents the undead threat. Vampires should not ever come into combat with an entire party at once unless it is a last resort or complete surprise, and a Lich worth his salt would never be caught plotting in the same general area as his phylactery. In either case, contingency plans should definitely be in place. If the DM presents them this way, they deserve to go <poof>).

Long "live" Undeath!


Vampires and liches of the world: undie! We have nothing to lose but our unlives!

Liberty's Edge

Larry Lichman wrote:

Vampires may be cheap, but us liches are never cheap!

Long "live" Undeath!

*cof cof*

i just remember one of our greates but not most powerful contributor.. Strahd von Zarovich outsmart one of the greatest liches... Azalin Rex... even being weaker... but of course

Strahd is the Land, there was no other choice about how that was going to end... none at all

*michievous grin*


JahellTheBard wrote:
Vampires always had few hit point, comparet to their CR, because they where so difficult to damage and kill.

Actually, not anymore. From Beta PFRPG, pag. 296: "Note that undead use their Charisma bonus in place of their Constitution bonus when determining hit points (although skeletons, zombies, and other mindless undead should have their Charisma scores set to 10)."

Finally, Liches(especially Sorcerers...) and Vampires are really true BBEG, and not monsters with puny hp waiting to be burned away...

Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Roleplaying Game / General Discussion (Prerelease) / [Channel Positive Energy] Flavor text or written as it is intended to work? All Messageboards
Recent threads in General Discussion (Prerelease)
Druid / Monk?