I have already posted this somewhere before, but since we now have a forum dedicated to Playtest Reports, I will repost it here for the sake of completeness:
I was one of those who really liked the change of Turning Undead rules into Channel (Positive/Negative) Energy in the Pathfinder RPG. Having used the rules in my game for a while now, I still prefer the new rules to the old rules, but I do have some new reservations - chiefly that the mechanic is very overpowered when the party is fighting Undead.
The party in the campaign in question, currently consists of the following classes, all of which are at level 9:
1 x Wizard
1 x Fighter/Barbarian
1 x Cleric
1 x Paladin
1 x Rogue
The Cleric has taken feats that improve turning undead, notably: Quicken Turning, Improved Turning and Extra Turning
It is a mostly 3.5E game, but I am gradually introducing more and more Pathfinder RPG elements with an eye towards a full conversion after Alpha 3 is released. The campaign world is my own as are the adventures.
I will not bore you with the details of the story, but suffice it to say that the party, although dealing with other pressing issues, had decided to take on a sidequest and embark on an expedition to investigate an ancient tomb dating back to the Karminian civilization in the desert they were visiting.
Having made their treck and dealt with the traps they, needless to say began encountering numerous undead. The undead threats were varied, ranging from numerous weak undead (even as lowly as zombies or improved skeletons) to ghasts, ghost, wights and mummies. None of these encounters posed any problems to the party - it was not even close.
Eventually, they found out that undeath was the Karminian version of the afterlife and found some undead with their souls sundered from their bodies and so on and so on jumping over the story... basically they became unsure whether slaughtering them is a good idea and left the tomb. They eventually returned, however, their numbers further augmented by 3 8th level paladins.
Again jumping over the story to the combats:
- a fight against numerous heavily upgraded skeletons teamed up with 2 mummies: not a problem for the party at all
- a fight against 4 bodaks: not a problem for the party at all
- a fight against 4 wights and 4 ghosts (2 ghosts and 2 wights had 7 class levels each - a wizard and a rogue among both)
- a fight against a Mummy Lord (CR15): not a problem for the party at all
The finnal battle was preceded by an encounter with two rust monsters, after which the party did not have any time to rest.
The setup was that the party then entered the burial chamber of King Ochran where it fought him, as well as his 4 advisors. The room was made of metal and was very cold - the floor was made of ice. Beneath the ice was a natural cavern and some way down in that cavern was a pool of lava with a path winding through it. The lava was melting the ice, but it was refreezing almost immediately, due to the magic of a Black Sun that adorned the ceiling and exuded dark energy (providing +2 to resistance against Channel Positive Energy) and cold. Nevertheless there were cracks in the ice that were moving along the floor (ice was cracking and then always refreezing a round later) that a character could fall through.
The chamber contained the sarcofagi of king's 4 advisors (4 mummies). On top of that, however, the party also had to simultaneously face King Ochran, whose body was represented by a mummy with upgraded stats and 10 levels of sorceror and whose soul (sundered from the body) was represented by a spectre with upgraded stats and also 10 levels of sorcerer. Both the body of Ochran and the soul of Ochran also received bonus hit points and additional +2 to their turn resistance.
Suffice it to say, that the party still slaughtered this entourage wholesale and I did not pull my punches (Cloudkills... Fireballs to hurt them and melt the ice temporarily to make them fall through and so on - though I deliberately did not give the sorcerers Dominate as I did think that would have been an overkill - perhaps I was wrong), yet at the end of the day, the party was not terribly ruined and did not pull through by just the nick of their teeth. OK, the party was not in the best of shapes after it was all over, but it was still disturbingly combat capable.
As such, I do think that the current incarnation of Channel Positive Energy is overpowered when the party is dealing with undead, though I still prefer it to the old 3.5 Turning Undead mechanic.
Perhaps the way to balance the Channel Energy ability would be to look at spells for inspiration.
Suppose that instead of the current healing/damage mechanic, we would instead take cue from cure ... wounds and cause ... wounds spells, which after all, are supposed to rely on positive and negative energy respectively.
Channel energy would be a touch effect to begin with. In its positive energy version, it would cure hit points to the tune of 1d8, plus an additional 1d8 hit points every two levels thereafter (hence 2d8 at third level, 3d8 at fourth level, etcetera). Of course, the ability would also do equivalent damage to the undead upon a succesful touch attack. The Channel Negative Energy ability would, naturaly, work in the opposite manner.
The actual turning and commanding mechanics would remain the same as they are in the current Channel Energy desciptions, with the will save determining whether the undead in question flee/are commanded.
It is possible to have this work only on the undead creature targeted by the damaging effect of this ability, but to better evoke the origin of this ability in the turn undead mechanic, it is also feasible to say that all undead within 30 feet of the cleric have to make the saving throw, as the proximity of the negative/positive energy is enough to turn/command them even when they are not damaged/healed. This would also retain the probable design aim of enabling the cleric to heal while doing other actions - he is healing (or damaging) only one individual (or undead creature), but still turning/commanding surrounding undead.
At 9th level, clerics gain 5th level spells and Cure Light Wounds, Mass (or Cause Light Wounds, Mass) is among them. At this stage, it is therefore feasible and balanced to give the cleric the option to also use an area of effect (30' burst centered around the cleric) use of the Channel Energy ability, but using the area of effect ability would only cure/cause damage per creature that uses 4 less d8 dice than the targeted single-creature ability. Hence, it would cure 1d8 hit points at level 9, 2d8 hit points at level 11 and so on. The turning/commanding effects would remain the same for both the targeted and the area of effect versions of Channel Energy.
Note 1: This mechanic is based on the cure/cause ... wounds spells. Because it combines healing/wounding with the turning/comanding mechanic, I thought it prudent to eliminate the +1hp per level cured/caused, which if kept would have made the ability even more overpowered at higher levels than it was before. It may also be desirable to tone down the dice to d6s, but the latter may not be necessary at all given the area of effect nerf it receives compared to the previous Channel Energy mechanic. I have not playtested this version, so that is as of yet unclear.
Note 2: Given this kind of transparency between cure/cause spells and the Channel Energy ability, it could be an interesting experiment to permit Clerics to drop their spells of the appropriate level to fuel additional Channel Energy uses instead of spontaneously casting cure/cause spells.
to the OP: you said your party breezed past these encounters, but you did not say, or give any evidence to support the claim that; they breezed past the encounters because of channeled energy.
What was the problem? Was it the fleeing or the damage? If it was damage than I assure you, a cleric of 10th level has way more powerful things at his disposal against undead than 5d6 positive energy damage with a save for half.
If it was the fleeing.... why? Your guys get a will save against it, have a +2 circumstance bonus, and probably had turn resistance on top of that! Your BBEG could have cast a variety of spells, Magic Circle against Good comes to mind, to give a further boost to will saves. Beyond that, feats like Iron Will should come into play.
Did you remember that undead use their CHA mod in place of their CON to calculate HP now? Did any of them have the vastly improved Toughness feat?
If anything, undead in pathfinder are stronger than their 3.5 counterparts..
EDIT: Also, you are critiquing Paizo's channeled energy and allowing a non-paizo feat in your game which directly affects, and gives a considerable boost to, channeled energy. Namely, Quickened Turning. I just caught that you mentioned this now, otherwise it would have been in the original post. Seriously, you are taking something that is usually a standard action and making it a free action. You expect this encounter to go well?
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 6
|
What was the problem? Was it the fleeing or the damage? If it was damage than I assure you, a cleric of 10th level has way more powerful things at his disposal against undead than 5d6 positive energy damage with a save for half.
Wanted to check on this - what do you see as being way more powerful for a 10th level cleric's action? Flame strike does more, but isn't useful except on tight groups. Mass cure light is a slight bit weaker (1d8+10, or about 4.5d6), and isn't usable nearly as many times a day. Point attack spells will do more damage to one target, but less damage overall. The turning heals the party and wounds the undead, making it pretty darned effective.
I do agree allowing quickened turning in PF RGP is probably a mistake. It's basically quickened mass cure light at that point.
|
If it was damage than I assure you, a cleric of 10th level has way more powerful things at his disposal against undead than 5d6 positive energy damage with a save for half.
Against every (undead) enemy in a 30-foot radius, plus healing allies at the same time? I doubt it very, very much.
I suspected that Channel Energy was too powerful, but I don't have a cleric in my playtest group so I was waiting to see how the cleric in the other playtest group did with it.
My guess is that Channel Energy is going to need limits beyond "per day." Hopefully I'll get the chance to see the feature first-hand before that section of PFRPG is up for notes.
If anything, undead in pathfinder are stronger than their 3.5 counterparts.
Undead are stronger, but only in an absolute sense. Clerics are (generally) more consistently effective against them now (and don't get me wrong, they should be more effective, within limits), as are rogues. And, when you get right down to it, as is every other PF PC.
--Jeff
I would like to point out that the game continued long after the particular snippet I posted (and indeed still is not at an end). The Cleric with the Quicken Turning aka Quicken Channeling feat was later retired. That helped somewhat, but Channel Positive Energy still remained overpowered against the undead. The eventual depowering of Channeling to conform to Cure spells of the appropriate level, however, seems to be working well.
Note that prior to the nerf, it was the damage component of the Channeling which was the most problematic.