Channel Energy Thoughts: Change Needed and Should It Be A Spell?

[Neil Phillips]

I think the new Channel Energy needs a rewrite. Turn undead needed to be redone because it was a labor to deal with. But in the new rules, say six undead and four players are in the channel energy zone… it is a ton of rolls. First, each undead makes a save roll (six of them), then takes either full or half damage (six more rolls), and the four heroes each heal (another 4 rolls). That is 16 dice rolls, which I find excessive. (Though, it isn’t much different than the outcome of a Mass Harm spell, is it?).

This is a situation where I wish saves worked backwards, you roll to see the effectiveness of the power, then compare it to a set DC for each undead making the save, like an attack is a roll vs. the AC. It would be faster because you roll once then see who makes/fails the save. But you can’t change those rules.

I suggest one damage roll that applies to all creatures, either as damage or healing. As for the saving throw, don’t know.
BTW: As a GM who writes many of his own adventures, I find I stay away from undead as it has become kind of a cliché. Certainly, it is not scary anymore to encounter undead, especially since everyone knows what a skeleton, zombie, etc. have, ability and statwise after all these years. Instead, I prefer to come up with new threats with alien abilities, and kind of stay away from undead.

This leads me to the cleric’s Channel Energy/Turn Undead. Why even have this as a class feature. In my games it is mainly useless, except under rare circumstance. I’d replace with Detect Evil, Good, Law, Chaos (clerics choice at creation), much like Paladins have Detect Evil. Then I’d make Turn Undead (or channel energy) a Spell. Really, in most repects, it is a spell. Then you can simply prepare it more or less as you need it, and get rid of all those feats for gaining more turnings and so on.

[William Senn]

Neil Phillips wrote:

I think the new Channel Energy needs a rewrite. Turn undead needed to be redone because it was a labor to deal with. But in the new rules, say six undead and four players are in the channel energy zone… it is a ton of rolls. First, each undead makes a save roll (six of them), then takes either full or half damage (six more rolls), and the four heroes each heal (another 4 rolls). That is 16 dice rolls, which I find excessive.

No, it's not 16 rolls. You only roll damage once. It's 7 rolls (6 saves for the undead, 1 damage/healing roll). And, if the undead are, for example, 6 identical skeletons, you can simplify things by just rolling for them once.

[Neil Phillips]

William Senn wrote:

Neil Phillips wrote:

I think the new Channel Energy needs a rewrite. Turn undead needed to be redone because it was a labor to deal with. But in the new rules, say six undead and four players are in the channel energy zone… it is a ton of rolls. First, each undead makes a save roll (six of them), then takes either full or half damage (six more rolls), and the four heroes each heal (another 4 rolls). That is 16 dice rolls, which I find excessive.

No, it's not 16 rolls. You only roll damage once. It's 7 rolls (6 saves for the undead, 1 damage/healing roll). And, if the undead are, for example, 6 identical skeletons, you can simplify things by just rolling for them once.

Thanks for the qualification.

[Snorter]

Even if you roll separate saves, I'd still only roll once for the strength of the positive energy surge, and all in the area are healed/harmed that amount (half damage on a save).

No different from fireballing the room. One value of damage that applies to all.

[Beckett]

Of coarse, there is nothing that says you have to do that.

[Pendagast]

So we should change/abandon channel energy (turn undead) because you don't use undead in your camapigns?

That makes tons of sense.

[Neil Phillips]

Pendagast wrote:

So we should change/abandon channel energy (turn undead) because you don't use undead in your camapigns?

That makes tons of sense.

Pendagast wrote:

So we should change/abandon channel energy (turn undead) because you don't use undead in your camapigns?

That makes tons of sense.

You miss my point. Undead have a place in the game, but too big. That is why it would be a good spell, useful for when you need it. Like all the things a Cleric can otherwise do.

I'm just saying that it seems to be a part of the Cleric more because of there is overkill of undead in adventures, a short hand for "there is evil here." I'd say more than 2/3rds of the adventures I have played in in the last year have undead in them, some just to have a monster with no real in on the story.

A lot of people call out the overuse of Drow, saying "come up with something new." I call out to the writers, "come up with something new."

Maybe de-emphasizing it in the class is the first step to something new.

[Snorter]

It may be that in the past, PC clerics have got to the end of an adventure with all of their turn attempts unused, which they denounce as a waste.

So the writers oblige by putting in undead 'to give the cleric something to do'.

Which creates a vicious cycle, of 'there's always undead, so we always need a cleric', followed by, 'since there's always a cleric in the party, we need to add undead, to use up his turning'.

And the inevitable conclusion of that;

'If the adventure is actually meant to feature undead, then we need to add double the amount we need, so there's still some left, after the inevitable turning'.

[Zurai]

It seems to me that the OP is completely missing the point of Channel Positive Energy, especially since he's harping on the undead angle.

CPE doesn't require undead to work, any more. You can CPE to heal the party for Xd6 damage. This means it's always useful no matter what kind of enemies the party is facing.

[Neil Phillips]

Zurai wrote:

It seems to me that the OP is completely missing the point of Channel Positive Energy, especially since he's harping on the undead angle.

CPE doesn't require undead to work, any more. You can CPE to heal the party for Xd6 damage. This means it's always useful no matter what kind of enemies the party is facing.

I realize they have extended the use of it, however, I still think the whole feature is unnecessary. We wouldn't be having this conversation if Turn Undead didn't exist as a class feature in the first place. Also, in combat it might be dangerous to use as it heals your enemies as well.

[Abraham spalding]

Yes and they designed it that way on purpose... yesh it's powerful, but if you aren't careful you'll undo all the work the fighter has done.

The idea of keeping this seperate ability is it allows the cleric to have a means of healing beyond his spells, letting him use the spells for buffs, flame strikes and other fun stuff.

And yes I know, clerics get all the good stuff. They always have and always will. I guess having a God at your back is just that good.

[Neil Phillips]

Abraham spalding wrote:

Yes and they designed it that way on purpose... yesh it's powerful, but if you aren't careful you'll undo all the work the fighter has done.

The idea of keeping this seperate ability is it allows the cleric to have a means of healing beyond his spells, letting him use the spells for buffs, flame strikes and other fun stuff.

And yes I know, clerics get all the good stuff. They always have and always will. I guess having a God at your back is just that good.

True. how about then: Make Turn Undead a spell and add "Detect ____*" and "Lay on Hands." Similar to the Paladin and far more useful.

If a Paladin can Detect Evil all the time, why can't a Cleric use Detect to seek its enemies (of course, i also think Detect Magic should be a class feature of a Wizard, and it sort of now is thanks to the new "Cantrips" ability.)

*Cleric's choice of what to detect made at character creation.

[Zurai]

Neil Phillips wrote:

I realize they have extended the use of it, however, I still think the whole feature is unnecessary. We wouldn't be having this conversation if Turn Undead didn't exist as a class feature in the first place. Also, in combat it might be dangerous to use as it heals your enemies as well.

Yeah, we would. They didn't extend Turn Undead because they felt TU was weak. They extended it because TU was needlessly complex and, more importantly, because they felt Clerics had to spend too many of their spells on healing. The second problem would still exist even if Turn Undead had never been in the game, and it wouldn't surprise me if they hit on a very similar solution even without Turn Undead to build upon. And as for the "it heals enemies too!!!!" - not if you use it out of combat, use it carefully IN combat, or take the Selective Channeling feat.

In short: it ain't broke. Don't fix it.

[Neil Phillips]

Zurai wrote:

In short: it ain't broke. Don't fix it.

Interesting quote, because this discussion is about fixing something that is broken. It is just that we are thinking of it as broken in different ways. You are thinking more the mechanics, how it works tactically in a game. I am thinking story, how it affects how it is written for, and I have given the example of the undead overkill in the writing that Channel Energy still will invoke.

See, I play games like Spirit of the Century, a FATE based game. In it characters have aspects that describe their heroic-ness. An example would be "Protector of the Citizens." Mechanically this can be used to gain bonuses here and there when citizens are in danger, but it also tells the GM he should include situations in adventures where citizens are in danger. This is how Turn Undead is treated by writers.

Now, I like DnD, d20, True20, Pathfinder, etc., but face it, ther are so may cliche's in the adventures, many that i have encountered since I was introduced to the game in B2: The Keep on the Borderlands in 1982, and undead is one of them.

[Zurai]

Neil Phillips wrote:

You are thinking more the mechanics, how it works tactically in a game. I am thinking story, how it affects how it is written for, and I have given the example of the undead overkill in the writing that Channel Energy still will invoke.

I had to read the thread again, but I see no example of "undead overkill". I think you're trying to say that the existence of Channel Positive Energy requires writers to put undead in all of their adventures, and that's patently false. You could just as easily say that paladins' immunity to disease and ability cure disease requires writers to put diseases in all their adventures, or monks' ability to fall long distances with no damage requires writers to fill their adventures with pit traps and bull rushes off tall cliffs.

[Neil Phillips]

Zurai wrote:

I had to read the thread again, but I see no example of "undead overkill". I think you're trying to say that the existence of Channel Positive Energy requires writers to put undead in all of their adventures, and that's patently false.

Turn Undead, the thing they are tryng t9o fix, has been the cause of too much undead. As I said, almost every adventure has a little undead to the point where undead has become ho hum, like the overuse of Drow, or Star trek's overkill of the Borg.

You want to keep it a class feature, i want to demote it and maybe fix it a different way. If you cannot see my point then maybe I am presenting it wrong.

[Zurai]

I havn't seen any gratuitous over-use of undead, personally. /shrug

Honestly, it sounds exactly like the guy a few posts up said: you don't like undead in your personal campaign, so you want to remove anti-undead abilities because they wouldn't get used.

[Pendagast]

Turning used to work on demons and devils (outsiders) as well. I havent read that far, because we havent gotten to a level where we want to use demons or devils, but does anyone know off hand, does channel positive energy work against demons and devils too?

On the side of channel pos energy for healing, our 6th level cleric has selective channeling and extra channeling.
so he can ommit bad guys from his healing.
(well some)
At this point it seems almost too powerful, the party never really seems to be in peril, there is always tons of healing.
We actually considered dropping the cleric to add a druid because we wanted to play test the druid some, but then it was like "Holy cow, we cant NOT have the cleric!!"
When its like that, its too powerful.

Dont get me wrong, I dig the whole channel positive energy. The cleric does a great job at being tatical with it to get the most bang for his buck :waiting, holding actions, movement to the right place to get the best effect for it, teleporting to the front ofan undead combat, healing everyone and blasting undead...it's been awesome and 90% of me says I dont want to see it changed, but 10% says hmmm a little overboard when the cleric is a MUST have character, and the druid is no substitute.
We have compromised, we're keeping the cleric AND adding a druid.

I think it's because he took extra channeling, the xtra uses have really made it powerful (AND we have been fighting alot of undead.
D1.5, D4, Children of the void)

However, I like undead.

[Majuba]

Neil Phillips wrote:

Turn Undead, the thing they are tryng to fix, has been the cause of too much undead. As I said, almost every adventure has a little undead to the point where undead has become ho hum, like the overuse of Drow, or Star trek's overkill of the Borg.

I get what you're saying Neil. Turn Undead has caused (in your opinion of course) the inclusion of too many undead in adventures in the past, and would have been better off as a more optional spell to handle undead than a permanent class feature.

What some of the others are saying is that this problem, real or not, has been solved. Adventures no longer need include any undead for the ability to be useful, and it is still flavorful and appropriate for the Cleric to have.

So I think what they're trying to say is something along the lines of, "Stop worrying about them keeping Turn Undead, and embrace the new reality of usefulness and lack of railroading into undead inclusion."

[spalding]

Pendagast wrote:

Turning used to work on demons and devils (outsiders) as well. I havent read that far, because we havent gotten to a level where we want to use demons or devils, but does anyone know off hand, does channel positive energy work against demons and devils too?

There are feats that allow the cleric (or anyone with CXE) to affect creatures other than undead with their channelled energies. All the feats are in the pathfinder beta.

[crmanriq]

I'm looking at this differently.

To most parties, the cleric is essential.

To most players, the cleric is boring to play. You are a mediocre fighter, and a spellcaster who ends up having to convert all of your spell slots to cure spells.

I've yet to see someone who doesn't find a reason to multiclass out of cleric as soon as possible because there's no fun in running around slapping bandaids on party members while they get to kill the big bad guys and brag about it later ("you were flanking, and I sneak attacked for a bazillion points of damage!! I'm awesome!").

Turn undead in 3.5 was a very situational power. I had cleric characters that went through multiple levels without ever turning an undead. Which is why writers started looking for other uses of the turning ability - the most broken of which was probably Divine Metamagic, where you could end up Persistent Spell-ing buffs by burning turn attempts. So the ability became something to just spend for other purposes. (And still the cleric was boring.)

CPE changes all of this. A cleric can heal the entire party in one burst with CPE without spending his spell slot. If he has Selective Channeling, he can exclude the bad guys. If he has Quicken Turning, he can then go and smack a bad guy, or cast an offensive spell. Instead of Turn Undead that scaled very slowly and for little reason, the CPE scales the same as a rogue's sneak attack (1d6 every 2 levels). Yes, he's the heal bot, but he also gets to do the fun spells on his list.

Suddenly there is a reason for a cleric to stay a cleric. If he multiclasses, he loses the CPE progression and the Domain progression. I think there's a feat where he can get +4 levels to CPE (not higher than hit dice), but he'll still lose the domain progression.

I'm currently playing a low level cleric, and I honestly can't find a prestige class that I'd want to take that would be better than straight cleric.

Oh. I've used CPE to affect undead _once_ in 4 levels. And at the time I used it, I didn't know there were undead around. I was using it to heal the party - hurting undead was just a nice little bonus.

[Pendagast]

Abraham spalding wrote:

Pendagast wrote:

Turning used to work on demons and devils (outsiders) as well. I havent read that far, because we havent gotten to a level where we want to use demons or devils, but does anyone know off hand, does channel positive energy work against demons and devils too?

There are feats that allow the cleric (or anyone with CXE) to affect creatures other than undead with their channelled energies. All the feats are in the pathfinder beta.

Where are these feats?

Our Cleric has turning smite, selective channeling and extra turning.

In the downloaded beta we have,I can find no channel positive energy that works on outsiders?

[crmanriq]

Pendagast wrote:

Abraham spalding wrote:

Pendagast wrote:

Turning used to work on demons and devils (outsiders) as well. I havent read that far, because we havent gotten to a level where we want to use demons or devils, but does anyone know off hand, does channel positive energy work against demons and devils too?

There are feats that allow the cleric (or anyone with CXE) to affect creatures other than undead with their channelled energies. All the feats are in the pathfinder beta.

Where are these feats?

Our Cleric has turning smite, selective channeling and extra turning.

In the downloaded beta we have,I can find no channel positive energy that works on outsiders?

Page 96 of the Beta: Turn Outsider

[Pendagast]

crmanriq wrote:

Pendagast wrote:

Abraham spalding wrote:

Pendagast wrote:

Turning used to work on demons and devils (outsiders) as well. I havent read that far, because we havent gotten to a level where we want to use demons or devils, but does anyone know off hand, does channel positive energy work against demons and devils too?

There are feats that allow the cleric (or anyone with CXE) to affect creatures other than undead with their channelled energies. All the feats are in the pathfinder beta.

Where are these feats?

Our Cleric has turning smite, selective channeling and extra turning.

In the downloaded beta we have,I can find no channel positive energy that works on outsiders?

Page 96 of the Beta: Turn Outsider

Thats weird why is this not in my downloaded PDF version, was it written afterward?

[Zurai]

It's in my PDF version, which I downloaded on day 1 it was available.

However, it is NOT in the table of feats in the PDF, for whatever reason.

[crmanriq]

Pendagast wrote:

crmanriq wrote:

Pendagast wrote:

Abraham spalding wrote:

Pendagast wrote:

Turning used to work on demons and devils (outsiders) as well. I havent read that far, because we havent gotten to a level where we want to use demons or devils, but does anyone know off hand, does channel positive energy work against demons and devils too?

There are feats that allow the cleric (or anyone with CXE) to affect creatures other than undead with their channelled energies. All the feats are in the pathfinder beta.

Where are these feats?

Our Cleric has turning smite, selective channeling and extra turning.

In the downloaded beta we have,I can find no channel positive energy that works on outsiders?

Page 96 of the Beta: Turn Outsider

Thats weird why is this not in my downloaded PDF version, was it written afterward?

It's just missing from the feats table. (Hence the term "Beta").

[spalding]

Are you sure you are looking in the beta and not the alpha? I believe the alpha had them too, but they where placed differently then.

Edit: Ninja'd by crmanriq and zurai

[Death Zebra]

crmanriq wrote:

I've yet to see someone who doesn't find a reason to multiclass out of cleric as soon as possible because there's no fun in running around slapping bandaids on party members while they get to kill the big bad guys and brag about it later ("you were flanking, and I sneak attacked for a bazillion points of damage!! I'm awesome!").

Well, that is a problem of DnD overall, isn't it? I mean, I played in a game where the DM REALLY REALLY wanted to run a dungeon crawl. I was a fighter and was bored most of the time, because the game was basically a half hour of watching the Rogue do everything (search, disable traps, move silent to scout ahead, etc.) while we hung back. Then when he found something to fight we jump in, have a ten minute fight, then it was back to watching him search the area, check chests for traps, etc., then another half hour of watching him scout.

The trick is to write/find adventures that give specific things for all the character types to do. Instead of the rouge bypassing a trap, how about the Cleric using his Knowledge's or Spells to gain divine insight to get by a problem, bringing him into the front as something other than a healer.

but, as my argument of overuse of undead and Drow as cliche's, its hard to find adventures that do anything other than treat the classes as their cliche. There is still a mindset of old AD&D, the days before skills, and many writer's and players see skills as kind of a nuisance. I just played a game with a guy who prefers AD&D 1st Ed. because it is simpler. Sure it is, if you like to have your role clearly limited.

This is not true for all adventures, and I think Paizo has risen above these. Even pre-Paizo Dungeon rose above it all years ago. One of my fave adventures was a ghost-mystery module with almost no combat. Everything was deduction and use of non-weapon proficiencies.

[Neil Phillips]

Death Zebra wrote:

but, as my argument of overuse of undead and Drow as cliche's,

Just a note, I accidentally posted this under my wife's ID. Forgot to log her out an me in.

[Pendagast]

Well see a fighter in a dungeon crawl can do alot if the DM is good.

See not EVERYthing can be disabled say, like puzzle locks or things that get "triggered" by movement to open door a, but close stairway E and all sorts of combos that basically anyone can be in on.

And sure clerics can cast find traps and what not, but that doesnt do alot for the fighter.

[Beckett]

Death Zebra wrote:

The trick is to write/find adventures that give specific things for all the character types to do. Instead of the rouge bypassing a trap, how about the Cleric using his Knowledge's or Spells to gain divine insight to get by a problem, . . .

Because most of the 3.5 books summed up all knowledge skills into Kow (Arcane) and Know (Rogue only). . .

[Neil Phillips]

Beckett wrote:

Because most of the 3.5 books summed up all knowledge skills into Kow (Arcane) and Know (Rogue only). . .

From the 3.5 SRD:

* Arcana (ancient mysteries, magic traditions, arcane symbols, cryptic phrases, constructs, dragons, magical beasts)
* Architecture and engineering (buildings, aqueducts, bridges, fortifications)
* Dungeoneering (aberrations, caverns, oozes, spelunking)
* Geography (lands, terrain, climate, people)
* History (royalty, wars, colonies, migrations, founding of cities)
* Local (legends, personalities, inhabitants, laws, customs, traditions, humanoids)
* Nature (animals, fey, giants, monstrous humanoids, plants, seasons and cycles, weather, vermin)
* Nobility and royalty (lineages, heraldry, family trees, mottoes, personalities)
* Religion (gods and goddesses, mythic history, ecclesiastic tradition, holy symbols, undead)
* The planes (the Inner Planes, the Outer Planes, the Astral Plane, the Ethereal Plane, outsiders, elementals, magic related to the planes)

How about a puzzle that relies on Knowledge (Religion), or (Archetecture/Engineering). I can see it now, "Save your spell, Cleric, I know the answer: My engineering knowledge tells me that symbol is as an old symbol for "bridgemaker." Press it. it is the answer!"

As with any adventure, premade or home brew, I make sure to add in things that will highlight each character's individual talent, even if it means altering a module a little, so things like the above will happen. In a way, I try and make successfully rolling a skill as dramatic as successfully rolling to hit against an enemy!