Cleric - Negative Energy channeling

[Tholas]

Yes, I know all people are happy about the new energy channeling but I have a small gripe with negative energy channeling.

Any neutral cleric PC who selects negative energy channeling for flavor reasons of because he worship a deity such as Wee Jas it pretty much hosed when he is fighting undead. True, he can try to control, but not without healing them. Also he must be very carefull not to hurt his allies.
I just can't understand why channeling negative energy automatically implies that you must heal undead. Sorry, but the old Rebuke was way way cooler.

So basically I would like to suggest a bit more options for channel energy. I'd be totally happy if the cleric can just choose to omit the damage and/or healing and go for the secondary effect only. Maybe with a small boost on the DC.

[tergiver]

That's a good idea - call it Focused Negative Channeling, and make Selective Channeling a prerequisite.

[Wrath]

Tholas wrote:

Yes, I know all people are happy about the new energy channeling but I have a small gripe with negative energy channeling.

Any neutral cleric PC who selects negative energy channeling for flavor reasons of because he worship a deity such as Wee Jas it pretty much hosed when he is fighting undead. True, he can try to control, but not without healing them. Also he must be very carefull not to hurt his allies.
I just can't understand why channeling negative energy automatically implies that you must heal undead. Sorry, but the old Rebuke was way way cooler.

So basically I would like to suggest a bit more options for channel energy. I'd be totally happy if the cleric can just choose to omit the damage and/or healing and go for the secondary effect only. Maybe with a small boost on the DC.

Agreed. We play a game where my PC's are evil. My cleric used to rebuke and control undead all the time. Since the rewrite, he only uses the channeling feat as a burst wepon in close quarters and dire consequences (he had to take selective channeling for this to work even).

It does nerf the options for neutral or evil players. But as DM I've used it to great effect to heal my undead while hurting the players (Spire of long shadows was much harder).

We thought about using the option to either burst wepon the power OR channel for control. However this doesn't really fix the problem is it just undermines the usefulness of positive energy if we keep the same mechanic.

Tis a conundrum.

[Dan Davis]

I wouldn't mind seeing a feat that would allow good clerics to channel negative energy (and vice versa). Maybe at 1d6 less than normal.

[Tholas]

tergiver wrote:

That's a good idea - call it Focused Negative Channeling, and make Selective Channeling a prerequisite.

Yea, that would be one way of doing it. But I'd suggest to add that bit of versatility directly into channel energy. I've no problem with taking Selective Channeling because it's an equal good choice for positive and negative channeling clerics but taking two feats just to be effective as an negative energy channeling cleric PC in an undead heavy environment is kind of steep.

Just some very rough ideas to get some more versatility:

Channel Positive Energy:
- Instead of frightening undead you can try to slow them for 1d4 + charisma bonus rounds.
- You can forego all normal effects and instead give any living creature in 30 feet a sacred bonus equal to 1/4 your cleric level(minimum 1) to armor class and saves for 1d4 + charisma bonus rounds (Alternatively: ... you can give 1 + charisma bonus living creatures in 30 feet a sacred bonus equal to 1/2 your cleric level(minimum 1)to armor class and saves for one round.)

Channel Negative Energy:
- Instead of controlling you can awe undead. Each undead in 30 feet must make a Will save(DC 10 + 1/2 cleric level + charisma bonus) of cower for 1d4 + charisma bonus rounds.
- You can forego all normal effects and instead give give any undead creature in 30 feet a profane bonus to armor class and saves (1/4 your cleric level, minimum 1) for 1d4 + charisma bonus rounds .. (basically the same as above)

[seekerofshadowlight]

I think the rules are simple and work as is. If you want to do something like selective channel[which it sounds almost just like] then thats a feat very simple and easy. No need to complicate it just add a feat.

[Montalve]

i agree with seeker of the light
having used lots of god clerics i love how the new mechanics work for them

again...
if people choose to be the evil cleric or the neutral cleric with negative channeling... don't complain you are not able to heal friends... think in options

an evil cleric heals the undeads and control them... now he has a number of fully healed undeads udner his control that he can use:

a) to attack other undeads
b) to keep still while the other players destroy them
c) to anoy the paladin and good cleric

i see a few evil gods giving easy healign to their clerics... specially does about undead, death and destruction... why? because its something they get benefit

gods of death... why wpuld they want to stave what is just natural?
gods of undeath... heal undeads, kill the living createmore undeads
gods of destruction... kill everything!

evil clerics play a different game than good clerics... the choices are different and need to play according to them... if they wanted to heal they could have chosen to be good or use positive channeling

using a feat while could work... would ask... why the cleric's god would let them use it... why would Rovagauh would let one of his clerics to be able to heal anything at all? or why would accept Saranrae or Iomedae use dark energies to further their purposes?

i can agree that the neutral cleric could use BOTH types of channeling... they have both aspects on themselves... but i would ask they chose one... the other could cost as 2 uses.

[Wrath]

Montalve wrote:

i agree with seeker of the light

having used lots of god clerics i love how the new mechanics work for them

again...
if people choose to be the evil cleric or the neutral cleric with negative channeling... don't complain you are not able to heal friends... think in options

an evil cleric heals the undeads and control them... now he has a number of fully healed undeads udner his control that he can use:

a) to attack other undeads
b) to keep still while the other players destroy them
c) to anoy the paladin and good cleric

i see a few evil gods giving easy healign to their clerics... specially does about undead, death and destruction... why? because its something they get benefit

gods of death... why wpuld they want to stave what is just natural?
gods of undeath... heal undeads, kill the living createmore undeads
gods of destruction... kill everything!

evil clerics play a different game than good clerics... the choices are different and need to play according to them... if they wanted to heal they could have chosen to be good or use positive channeling

using a feat while could work... would ask... why the cleric's god would let them use it... why would Rovagauh would let one of his clerics to be able to heal anything at all? or why would accept Saranrae or Iomedae use dark energies to further their purposes?

i can agree that the neutral cleric could use BOTH types of channeling... they have both aspects on themselves... but i would ask they chose one... the other could cost as 2 uses.

Actually, its not the heal that my players want. It's the fact that in order to try adn control the undead, you also heal em up. Previous incarnations of the turn/rebuke mechanoc never had this. Turn for destroy if high enough level or rebuke for control.

My player enjoyed the idea of controlling the undead to use against his opponents. It was cool as far as he was concerned.

Now he might get some undead under his control, but he risks hurting all his companions and healing the other undead he doesn't get to control. That's a mechanic that doesn't bode well for a PC in a party.

However, like you say, it's the price you pay for evil. It's just a pity it is a mechanic that is very reduced in efficiency for neutral or evil clerics. It hasn't stopped our game nor destroyed the fun my player has, but it has removed a whole section of the game he enjoyed.

[Tholas]

Wrath wrote:

However, like you say, it's the price you pay for evil. It's just a pity it is a mechanic that is very reduced in efficiency for neutral or evil clerics. It hasn't stopped our game nor destroyed the fun my player has, but it has removed a whole section of the game he enjoyed.

It is too high a price to pay for my taste. Nobody in his right mind would play a negative energy channeling neutral cleric if he'd the choice. For me it means that the Wee Jas cleric I play in our ongoing Age of Worms campaign needs to stay LG despite some very brutal events at the conclusion of a certain arena event. I really don't like it when game mechanics narrow roleplaying choices. :-(

[Tarren Dei]

Tholas wrote:

Wrath wrote:

However, like you say, it's the price you pay for evil. It's just a pity it is a mechanic that is very reduced in efficiency for neutral or evil clerics. It hasn't stopped our game nor destroyed the fun my player has, but it has removed a whole section of the game he enjoyed.

It is too high a price to pay for my taste. Nobody in his right mind would play a negative energy channeling neutral cleric if he'd the choice. For me it means that the Wee Jas cleric I play in our ongoing Age of Worms campaign needs to stay LG despite some very brutal events at the conclusion of a certain arena event. I really don't like it when game mechanics narrow roleplaying choices. :-(

But the negative energy channeling cleric is able to cause damage much more often than a positive energy channeling cleric. Yes, the +energy cleric hurts undead. The -energy cleric hurts everything else. Actually, I think the -energy cleric has a huge advantage here.

[Montalve]

Tarren Dei wrote:

But the negative energy channeling cleric is able to cause damage much more often than a positive energy channeling cleric. Yes, the +energy cleric hurts undead. The -energy cleric hurts everything else. Actually, I think the -energy cleric has a huge advantage here.

i agree, the evil cleric is an excellent mini nuke... a few evil priest could enter alone in combat against armies and decimate it with well placed negative channels just to have the rest of the army bull rushing the survivors the next round... talking about demoralicing armies....

:D ok... now i like this nasty tactic

[Tholas]

Montalve wrote:

i agree, the evil cleric is an excellent mini nuke... a few evil priest could enter alone in combat against armies and decimate it with well placed negative channels just to have the rest of the army bull rushing the survivors the next round... talking about demoralicing armies....

:D ok... now i like this nasty tactic

Yea, but I am concerned about player tactics and not about something the DM might throw at the party.

The way I see it:

Positive Energy Channeling

• Very powerful when used while fighting undead creatures, even with low charisma.
• Needs Selective Channeling and a decent charisma bonus to be effective in combat against living creatures. You and your group might have to coordinate attacks and targets so you can use Selective Channeling to exclude damaged enemies.
• Even with a low charisma bonus it is still very good for downtime healing.

Negative Energy Channeling

• You need to have Selective Channeling and a good charisma bonus to use negative channeling in a fight, but unless you have a very high charisma bonus you and your group most likely have to coordinate before you can use your ability without harming your buddies.
• When fighting undead you have to use your ability at the beginning of the fight or only against undamaged targets. Once again you have to coordinate and maneuver with your group.
• Unless you have some undead under control you can't use negative channeling for anything out of combat.

So what does this mean
It is easy for your group to attack only as much targets than you can exclude from your positive energy burst but it is not so easy to get 'excess' group members out of 30 feet radius when you want to channel negative energy. The ones that have to move will most probably forfeit attacks and move to a disadvantageous tactical position. I really don't think that the damage from channeling would make up for that.

To sum it up

You don't have to invest in high charisma nor take Selective Channeling to get excellent use out of positive energy channeling. The same is definitely not true for negative energy channeling.

[Montalve]

think outside the box...

good clerics

a combat is confusing, but needs to be tactical too... if the clerics allies are getting mauled that bad... its time of a tactical movement, players rounding close to the good cleric to be healed and to prepare a new attack or a different plan.

aside a good god of healing will allow the cleric to heal EVERYTHING, that is his job, no complains allowed by the good god of healing.

evil clerics

tactical planning... walks without troubling the enemies (maybe disguised or with some invisibility cast by the wizard (think like a team)) then nuke the surprised enemies while his allies have time to rush against the already hit group.

control the undeads, use them to kill the other undeads, then let your allies destroy them...

there are more tactics than just heal or damage... also... if the evil cleric is fighting along a couple of strong fighters but their weaposn don't do a lot ofsamage against their enemies, or they are evading them, an use of the negative energy while not to hampering versus the fighters it can hurt a lot another characters with less hit points... letting the fighter do a more efficient work.

as DM and as Player you can think nasty tactics... you just need your group to go along with them... if every one work by their side... it doesn't matter the slective channeling... it will be of little use

[Tholas]

Montalve wrote:

as DM and as Player you can think nasty tactics... you just need your group to go along with them... if every one work by their side... it doesn't matter the slective channeling... it will be of little use

Indeed, but as cool as negative energy channeling sounds at first glance I see two problems.

- Sooner or later enemies will adapt to your tactics. Going to far away from the rest of your party/your healer is not a good idea. I can think of quite a few encounters we had in our AoW so far that would have went very south.
- The first few times it might be cool and exiting for the other players to watch their cleric kicking butts but, at least in my group, they would start to resent being dictated tactics and watching from the sidelines sooner than later.

But honestly I could live with all the consequences of negative channeling if I could choose NOT to heal undead or damage the living. I don't think the feat Selective Channeling would be dimished by that.

To sum my opinion up one last time: 3.5t Rebuke was cool, Pathfinder RPGs channel negative energy is imho a bad cliche and no feasible option for a PC in a normal party. The cleric got cut back too much in other areas(spells per day, self buffs, ...) and as far as I see channel energy was meant as a compensation.

[Montalve]

Tholas wrote:

Indeed, but as cool as negative energy channeling sounds at first glance I see two problems.

- Sooner or later enemies will adapt to your tactics. Going to far away from the rest of your party/your healer is not a good idea. I can think of quite a few encounters we had in our AoW so far that would have went very south.

the enemy or the DM?

If its the enemy? easy don't let anyone live... *voice of cleric preaching* "your god commands to kill everyone of them or enslave them or something, not to let them run!"
if its the DM, ask him to stop metagamign, unless your actions grow famous or notorius, there is no reason for your enemies to learn your tactics.
and try not tor epeat your tactics vs the same enemy.

Tholas wrote:

- The first few times it might be cool and exiting for the other players to watch their cleric kicking butts but, at least in my group, they would start to resent being dictated tactics and watching from the sidelines sooner than later.

why do you think people resent tyranies? being the evil guy in the team its not easy, but someone has to do it, specially the evil cleric

and... the idea is not to kick butt, but to soften... your fighter prefers to fight an enemy at the 100% of his health and power? or would he prefer to reach one that is a bit softened so he can kick him harder... if its ane evil party and the enemy is in the ground in pain, he will enjoy it even more... believe me THEY DO...

Tholas wrote:

But honestly I could live with all the consequences of negative channeling if I could choose NOT to heal undead or damage the living. I don't think the feat Selective Channeling would be dimished by that.

ahhh yes tricky... the problem is... negative energy is related to negative plane, and every undead description would say that they arealive in due to their connection to the negative plane... if you give water to a plant it grows... if you give oil to a flame it will grew... its the same with the undead... either you control them or is time for a new tactic.

Tholas wrote:

To sum my opinion up one last time: 3.5t Rebuke was cool, Pathfinder RPGs channel negative energy is imho a bad cliche and no feasible option for a PC in a normal party. The cleric got cut back too much in other areas(spells per day, self buffs, ...) and as far as I see channel energy was meant as a compensation.

i disagree... but i haven't played and evil party... right now i am the good cleric... nexttime i promsie i will be the evil cleric with the nasty tactics mentioned above.

but we agree... the clerics of the old editions demand longer time duration for the buffs!! the clerics have spoken!

[Tholas]

Montalve, when did I said that I wanted to play an evil cleric in an evil party? Please read my posts, especially the first, again.

Well, I think I have made my point. Since I don't like polluting other threads with my pet agendas all I can hope now is that Jason reads this and hopefully considers some changes. I just wish I'd choosen a snappier title.

[Montalve]

Tholas wrote:

Montalve, when did I said that I wanted to play an evil cleric in an evil party? Please read my posts, especially the first, again.

Well, I think I have made my point. Since I don't like polluting other threads with my pet agendas all I can hope now is that Jason reads this and hopefully considers some changes. I just wish I'd choosen a snappier title.

i understand Tholas

but choose have consequences
negative energy is death, if granted by the gods why would they stop their hand
the contrary is true, positive energy is life...

look them as weapons... or medicine... even if you are in the way or you take it by accident theweapon and the drug have the same effect on you as it will have in anyone else... weapons don't care about who you want to spare... if you sue a machine gun in an alley with enemies and friends you aregoing tro hit everyone, so will a perfume be smell bu those you like or not... so i feel is how positive and negative energy works

i agree to eevryone agrees with this vision, that peopel want to spare their friends (damage) or their enemies (healing) or not being able to heal undeads unless they control them

i see options in how they exist, it just needs creativity and tactics...

otherwise requires more math, and i know not many dms not many players want to be taking into accounting something else like: who you affect and who you not

aside of that, its Jason rule, i just hope its not changed

[Jason Bulmahn]

I have been considering making the damage portion of this feat optional. So that when you channel energy, you can just go for the secondary effect against undead. This certainly helps negative channel PCs.

Thoughts?

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing

[Montalve]

Jason Bulmahn wrote:

I have been considering making the damage portion of this feat optional. So that when you channel energy, you can just go for the secondary effect against undead. This certainly helps negative channel PCs.

Thoughts?

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing

sounds like an interesting compromise

then the real factor is that it is used to control/destroy undeads... the healing/hurting is just something collateral?

[Epic Meepo]

Jason Bulmahn wrote:

I have been considering making the damage portion of this feat optional. So that when you channel energy, you can just go for the secondary effect against undead. This certainly helps negative channel PCs.

Thoughts?

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing

More tactical options is always a good thing, so I say go for it.

[Tholas]

Jason, first a big thanks for the reply! Honestly, I was a bit troubled that this thread slips under your radar.

Jason Bulmahn wrote:

I have been considering making the damage portion of this feat optional. So that when you channel energy, you can just go for the secondary effect against undead. This certainly helps negative channel PCs.

Do you mean adding this feature to the Selective Channeling feat? I'd be happy with that as it makes it a good choice for any cleric, regardless(well, nearly) of his charisma bonus.

But I had some time thinking about the whole thing and have come up with another suggestion. Define 30 feet radius as the maximum distance and give the cleric some options to modifiy that radius, or even turn it into a cone or line.

Some or all of these options could come with
- the ability to channel energy. (like decreasing the radius)
- by feats.(like ommiting a certain effect)
- the class progression. (like changing it to a cone and/or line)
- a special domain open for all clerics. (like boost one effect in expense of the others.)

I especially like the idea of a channeling centered domain available for all clerics.

[Montalve]

there are already feats that do a few ofthe things you ask for

no to the cone shapped... to much to powerful specially if you are planing to use to make damage... the cleric don't pushe energy like a cone spell... the cleric charges his surroundingswith power of his faith... which emanates from him

[Tholas]

Montalve wrote:

no to the cone shapped... to much to powerful specially if you are planing to use to make damage... the cleric don't pushe energy like a cone spell... the cleric charges his surroundingswith power of his faith... which emanates from him

Yes it's more powerful but you could always charge more than one channel energy attempt per use. Maybe two for a cone and three for a line. Remember that Extra Channel Energy only gives two more attempts and can not be taken multiple times. as long as you're not allowing Nightsticks cheese I don't see much of a problem.

[seekerofshadowlight]

Jason Bulmahn wrote:

I have been considering making the damage portion of this feat optional. So that when you channel energy, you can just go for the secondary effect against undead. This certainly helps negative channel PCs.

Thoughts?

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing

For a feat yeah but myself I would like the main channel left as it is now.

[Wrath]

Jason Bulmahn wrote:

I have been considering making the damage portion of this feat optional. So that when you channel energy, you can just go for the secondary effect against undead. This certainly helps negative channel PCs.

Thoughts?

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing

My players would love this. We haven't gotten around to house ruling it this way yet, but we're coming into some very undead heavy environments soon and I'd bet dollar it's going to come up in game.

Cheers

[Gurubabaramalamaswami]

seekerofshadowlight wrote:

Jason Bulmahn wrote:

I have been considering making the damage portion of this feat optional. So that when you channel energy, you can just go for the secondary effect against undead. This certainly helps negative channel PCs.

Thoughts?

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing

For a feat yeah but myself I would like the main channel left as it is now.

Agreed. Not damaging one's allies should be reserved for the padawhans who've invested a feat learning to control their dark powers.

Wait...which genre are we talking about?

[Montalve]

Tholas wrote:

Montalve wrote:

no to the cone shapped... to much to powerful specially if you are planing to use to make damage... the cleric don't pushe energy like a cone spell... the cleric charges his surroundingswith power of his faith... which emanates from him

Yes it's more powerful but you could always charge more than one channel energy attempt per use. Maybe two for a cone and three for a line. Remember that Extra Channel Energy only gives two more attempts and can not be taken multiple times. as long as you're not allowing Nightsticks cheese I don't see much of a problem.

i would absolutely not agree to that...

you are getting free cone spells :S
even if it is for more uses i would not allow it

yes i would allow a feat to expand it, to make it more powerful, to be more specific, but not to be conned, it goes against the nature of the ability

[seekerofshadowlight]

Gurubabaramalamaswami wrote:

seekerofshadowlight wrote:

Jason Bulmahn wrote:

I have been considering making the damage portion of this feat optional. So that when you channel energy, you can just go for the secondary effect against undead. This certainly helps negative channel PCs.

Thoughts?

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing

For a feat yeah but myself I would like the main channel left as it is now.

Agreed. Not damaging one's allies should be reserved for the padawhans who've invested a feat learning to control their dark powers.

Wait...which genre are we talking about?

you are right channel is a bust of energy better control should come from feats.

[Tholas]

Montalve wrote:

yes i would allow a feat to expand it, to make it more powerful, to be more specific, but not to be conned, it goes against the nature of the ability

I don't think it would go against the nature of channeling but it would probably to powerful an ability to get for a feat or a channeling domain. A cleric should have to invest more than a feat slot or domain for such an ability.

I was inspired by James Jacob's excellent Apostle of the Green Lady(based on the Tenebrous Apostate) prestige class. Basically a cleric has to give up his regular channeling progression to get more specialized channeling effects, mostly against undead creatures. The epitome ability is Acherons Glory 1d8 damage for every effective channeling level to every living creature within a 30 foot cone.

Btw.: The more I think about it I'd really like a Apostle of the Green Lady like PrC for Pathfinder. Of course you'd have to drop the Binder requirements, convert the vestiges(to make it available for clerics of every deity, each with his own flavor) into something different, like a Saint Spirit... But now I start to seriously derail my own thread ... *slaps his wrists* :-P

[Erik Randall]

Jason Bulmahn wrote:

I have been considering making the damage portion of this feat optional. So that when you channel energy, you can just go for the secondary effect against undead. This certainly helps negative channel PCs.

Thoughts?

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing

I'm disappointed that Pathfinder tries to solve two goals (more healing and turning) with one power, and I wish we had separate rules for each.

Barring that, this would be a welcome change.