Just seeing how others feel about requiring a feat to selectively exclude enemies from the healing of Channel Energy?
Personally, it seems to me that almost every cleric with a moderate Charisma would end up taking the feat at some point. If so, then why bother having it cost a feat?
What I would like to see is that the selective feature be integrated into the basic channel energy ability. With the idea that you are channelling positive energy at your deity's will, would your deity really want you healing your enemies also? I'm also not sure I like it tied directly to the character's Charisma. Possibly instead have it start at excluding 1 character at 1st level and increasing by one every time the amount of damage/healing is increased (2 at 3rd, 3 at 5th, etc.)
Thoughts? Or is everyone else happy with the way it works now?
I'm OK with it. Many wizards will take Craft Wondrous Items, many barbarians and high-strength fighters will take Power attack, most druids will take natural spell...
Some feats end up being more generally useful than others. It's still possible to build character concepts that don't include them, though, and those concepts get 'extra' feats by not going down that path.
Requiring selective channeling mean that in-combat healing will be limited at low levels, and level dipping into cleric won't be quite as useful.
Remember that Paladins get energy channeling too, and also have to decide about Selective Channeling vs. a combat feat. Characters get more feats in Pathfinder than in 3.x, but the decisions about what feat to take are still important.
I am all for it staying a feat. It may need nerfed a bit to only work a few times per day as now it's a no brainer to take it.
Channel is a wave of positive energy, that's like saying a wizard can cast fireball and pick who it does not hit, same concept there.
|
I'm OK with it. Many wizards will take Craft Wondrous Items, many barbarians and high-strength fighters will take Power attack, most druids will take natural spell...
Some feats end up being more generally useful than others. It's still possible to build character concepts that don't include them, though, and those concepts get 'extra' feats by not going down that path.
that is not true...
i know many wizards (specially in 3.x) that will not take crafts wondrous items (then for the XP cost, now because they wantother feats)while high strenght fighters would take pwoer attack, it isnot useful for fighter or ranger archers... who are also fighting types
but yes i see fighting should be changed... without chosing feat acharacter should be able to sacrifice damage to be able to hit htier enemy... or make it more difficult to hit to enhance damege, or to protect himself better... just like Iron Heroes
Requiring selective channeling mean that in-combat healing will be limited at low levels, and level dipping into cleric won't be quite as useful.
or it forces the cleric to be smart and work tactically... i like this approach... and i am the cleric... i like how it works right now, if they want to makle it selective... make it a feat, not part of the power... same for negative channeling... no evil clerics not hurting their allies ¬¬
I'm happy with it as a Feat.
I agree it becomes almost an automatic default to take Selective Channeling. However I have the opposite response to that, in that I'd like to see either a higher prerequisite or more prequisites before taking it. It should be harder to get.
I think Channeling as it stands requires a certain amount of tactics to use in a combat situation, and that is EXACTLY why I like it.
As it stands it is not a combat tool.
It can be made to be a combat tool with some careful and cautious tactics, or by adding the Feat.
I'd like to see the Feat become harder to obtain.
But.. I do agree with you, right now the obvious predisposition on the part of the player is to take the Feat ASAP.
|
If your Cleric doesn't have a decent Charisma, it's pretty much a wasted feat. I've got no use for it with my current Pathfinder Clerics who range from Cha 10 to Cha 11, and I'm not about to blow both points off of my point-buy that could go into Wisdom and / or Constitution *and* a Feat to be able to selectively Channel.
If I specifically designed a Cleric to be all about the Channeling, with a high Charisma and lower Wisdom, etc. then it might be worth it, but I would rather play a *Cleric,* not a wannabe Dragon Shaman with a healing aura usable a couple times a day. Healbot? No thanks. I'll save it for very specific tactical uses (several allies near dropping, and a few d6 of healing on the bad-guy really won't matter much, out of combat to heal everyone, use in a wartime situation where hundreds of soldiers could use a blast of healing to get back on their feet, etc.).
About the only time I'd find it an attractive choice is fighting undead (if a positive energy channeler) or using undead minions and fighting living foes (if a negative energy channeler).
I see it as a necessary cost of Channeling.
Channeling is a very, very powerful ability. It is in effect *free* healing. All it costs you is something that statistically speaking you aren't using very often. (yes, when you use it you USE it but how many orcs do you try to turn? Goblins? dragons?). Undead make up a statistical minority of the creatures available.
So part of the price of this is that it heals your enemies unless you take a feat.
Is it a *must have* feat? Not necessarily- no. Games made it just fine without Channeling before, so no reason to think they have to have it in combat now.
If the cleric wants it in combat however, it doesn't come free. it costs a feat. And if the PC's are too overwhelmed then it'll Still heal some of the bad guys.
It's not so much an issue of "since everyone takes it, it shouldn't be a feat" as it is an issue of "the ability being that powerful is worth a cost. Feats are the cost the game has, so that is what you pay".
-S
|
|
If your Cleric doesn't have a decent Charisma, it's pretty much a wasted feat. I've got no use for it with my current Pathfinder Clerics who range from Cha 10 to Cha 11, and I'm not about to blow both points off of my point-buy that could go into Wisdom and / or Constitution *and* a Feat to be able to selectively Channel.
what attribute one lowers its one decision... i decided my cleric had 10 in con, but 13 in charisma... as soon as she can, she will get 14... and she is not built around channeling... but diplomacy and sense motive (16 wis)
yes, selective channeling should be a feat... and should ask for at least extra channeling as pre-requisite
I also think it needs to remain a feat. The reasons have already been listed by others.
I guess, I'm in the minority on this one. But my opinion is that the base Channel Energy ability should allow the cleric to exclude a few targets without taking a feat. Like the OP said, why would god want his/her clerics healing their enemies? I don't want to start any blasphemous rumors but maybe the gods have a sick sense of humor.
Basically, like the current Selective Channeling feat. I'm all for a new feat, we'll call it Improved Selective Channeling that allows the cleric to exclude even more targets. Just my opinion.
I like it as a feat.
It needs to remain a feat. It fits perfectly with 3.5 design ideas to have an ability that is useful in limited situations that becomes much more useful once a feat is used, thus providing a reason to make choices.
So yeah, needs to stay a feat.
|
|
I guess, I'm in the minority on this one. But my opinion is that the base Channel Energy ability should allow the cleric to exclude a few targets without taking a feat. Like the OP said, why would god want his/her clerics healing their enemies? I don't want to start any blasphemous rumors but maybe the gods have a sick sense of humor.
Basically, like the current Selective Channeling feat. I'm all for a new feat, we'll call it Improved Selective Channeling that allows the cleric to exclude even more targets. Just my opinion.
gods of healing/life/redemption "heal everything soon its ok, even if you are going to kill it later"
evil/death gods "kill everything its ok, i approve" or "ow common they are going to die anyway, make it easier for me and send them over, NOW!"
OK, so I'm one of the minority. I'm cool with that :) It's not the first time....
While we are on the topic of selective channelling, has anyone else had the opinion that the number is too low? Possibly something more like 3 + CHR mod maybe? Unless you really focus on boosting your Charisma, that is a big area of effect that would likely encompass several more opponents than your average cleric Charisma score would handle.
OK, so I'm one of the minority. I'm cool with that :) It's not the first time....
While we are on the topic of selective channeling, has anyone else had the opinion that the number is too low? Possibly something more like 3 + CHR mod maybe? Unless you really focus on boosting your Charisma, that is a big area of effect that would likely encompass several more opponents than your average cleric Charisma score would handle.
Adding an additional feat to exclude more targets makes perfect sense.
OK, so I'm one of the minority. I'm cool with that :) It's not the first time....
While we are on the topic of selective channelling, has anyone else had the opinion that the number is too low? Possibly something more like 3 + CHR mod maybe? Unless you really focus on boosting your Charisma, that is a big area of effect that would likely encompass several more opponents than your average cleric Charisma score would handle.
When I first read this I was thinking no... but it is at the expense of a feat. Granting 2 or 3 + CHA seems reasonable to me. At just CHA bonus even a cleric with a 15 charisma can only block select out 2 creatures which seems pretty anemic.
I think I would be fine with the idea of spending a feat if the number was increased slightly. Right now for example, my cleric with a 12 CHR would get very little benefit from the feat as written (oooh, ignore one enemy). If instead the feat was at least 2+CHR modifier I could see the feat as being useful to my character.
|
|
I think I would be fine with the idea of spending a feat if the number was increased slightly. Right now for example, my cleric with a 12 CHR would get very little benefit from the feat as written (oooh, ignore one enemy). If instead the feat was at least 2+CHR modifier I could see the feat as being useful to my character.
it has to be a fair feat
i would also got the posibility to ignore one enemybut alas i would reserve that either for the more powerful one, or the one closest to get killed
either way i don'tthinki would take it... i need other feats... i prefer the use of tactics