Channel energy - a plea for more versatility and less cliche


Open Comments


Some of the topic I want to discuss was brought up before but I really feel that it got not enough attention as the two threads where rather short lived and I got some new thoughts in the meantime.

Let me first try to sum up the gist of the two threads here and here:
As much as I am happy to see the old clunky turning mechanism go I am a bit unhappy about the cookie cutter approach of the new channel energy mechanics. Yea, channeling positive energy is really good and does alot to keep the group going without expending precious spell slots, but I really think that channeling negative energy is feeding a bad cliche and not an option for most players. Even for the evil cleric BBEG it seems kind of weird that he absolutely has to heal undead and damage the living. Jason had chimed in on this and said he is considering to make the damage/healing part optional, so you could go for the secondary effect.

So for my request:
I would really like to see some more versatility possibly coupled with slightly different approach that has more to do with being the vessel of the power of a deity instead of channeling some energy from some 'lame plane'.

A few ideas:

  • Every cleric has the power to channel his deities power through himself. The basic effect(healing/beneficial or damaging/adverse) is still dependant on the alignement of him and his deity on the good-evil axis.
  • A cleric who channels negative power is good in damaging enemies but might still have the option to heal/help allies, but not nearly as good as an cleric who channels positive power.
  • Depending on the chosen domains the cleric gains some some secondary power he can mix into or substitute for his channel power attempt.
  • - A cleric with the healing domain might forego the undead damaging part to empower the healing portion of his roll or use two turning attempts to heal one single ally for 1d6/level hitpoints.
  • - A cleric with the luck domain might use a channel attempt to let all allies within its radius reroll a save.
  • - A cleric with the destruction domain could use an channel attempt to destroy nonliving matter.
  • - A cleric with the evil domain could burn an channel attempt to make enemy creatures shaken.

Please do not take the above examples to seriously, thats all I can think of right now. It way past bedtime here an i guess some of these examples are a bit too good. %^O ZZzzZZZZzZZzZZZ

RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32

That's pretty much what domains are for.

Liberty's Edge

I actually like this idea of replacing the 3.5 and Pathfinder Domain power for something that incorporates Channel Energy into a chosen domain effect. Precedent is already there (see 3.5 Fire domain for example) and would make creating/updating non-OGL domains a little easier, since a single mechanic would be used, but the theme would change depending.

Example:

Good Domain - Channel Energy damages any with the Evil descriptor or alignment.

Plant Domain - Channel Energy damages any with the plant type.

This could be a great change to Channel energy. It eliminates the need for a feat to cover this kind of effect. And it doesn't make a Cleric more powerful than it was, something that certain domain changes seems to exploit.

Why wasn't this thought of earlier?

Shadow Lodge

So how would this work in a no alignments game?


Well, looking at my examples again they might be a tad too powerful, so maybe just some minor extra benefits and versatility through the domains and the rest through feats? But I have the distinct feeling that nobody would mind as long as it has a group beneficial effect. I also think it would add to the game if a group always has to wonder what domains that cleric BBEG had chosen. Like 'Uh! He might have the Death domain and can touch me for 1d6/CL damage if I go too near' or 'Damn, if he has the trickery domain he could jinx some of us long enough to get through with some pretty ugly save or suck spells"

One thing that irks me alot with the current channeling is that positive channelers don't have to invest into anything to get good use out of their power, as they can burn their channel attempts for healing after the battle. A char with negative channeling has to invest heavily into charisma and take the Selective Channeling feat to use his channeling without hurting his friends. Even so the negative channeler has to worry about saves for half damage, imho hardly worth spending your precious standard action on it.

Edit: That leaves Paladins out in the cold. So why not allowing them to choose one domain, but only for the channeling benefit?

Beckett wrote:
So how would this work in a no alignments game?

Maybe I am missing something but I don't see more problems than with the current channeling rules. A no alignement game is not covered by the core rules.


Tholas wrote:
One thing that irks me alot with the current channeling is that positive channelers don't have to invest into anything to get good use out of their power, as they can burn their channel attempts for healing after the battle. A char with negative channeling has to invest heavily into charisma and take the Selective Channeling feat to use his channeling without hurting his friends. Even so the negative channeler has to worry about saves for half damage, imho hardly worth spending your precious standard action on it.

You're not making an equivalent comparison:

You're comparing the Good Cleric Channeling OUTSIDE of combat to an Evil Cleric Channeling IN combat.
A Good Cleric Channeling IN combat is also healing (non-undead) enemies - not generally desirable.
An Evil Cleric Channeling OUTSIDE of combat can tell (non-undead) allies to leave him alone while he channels.
Yes, a Good Cleric is better at healing "Life" than Evil Clerics, but aren't they about equal at their own schticks?
Either one will probably invest in Selective Channeling if they care about in-combat Channeling. If not, they don't.

Tholas wrote:
That leaves Paladins out in the cold. Why not allow them to choose one domain, only for the channeling benefit?

Check out the post on Unified Class Mechanics: Cleric-Paladin

There's already a precedent in 3.5 for FEATS expanding the usage of Channel Energy to cover additional usages (and see Pathfinder Feats extendin Channel to Outsiders and Elementals). If Paladin's can access these just as easily, I think that would satisfy them alot. I agree that having a "Domain Option" (with full Caster Level for Domain Abilities) parallel to the Paladin Mount and Holy Weapon options would be good.
I also think Druids should be able to choose Healing and Sun Domains... (crossing fingers)

Shadow Lodge

I think the alignment thing can easily be bypassed by moving the prereq. over to the God they worship.


Daniel Simonson wrote:
I think the alignment thing can easily be bypassed by moving the prereq. over to the God they worship.

I agree.

That would also increase the combat effectiveness of groups of Clerics worshipping Neutral Gods when they try to Combat Channel at the same time, instead of half of their Channels counter-acting the other half :-)


For good clerics, channelling benefits allies and harms undead, but for evil clerics, their channelling only helps undead.
To introduce parity, I think that evil clerics’ channelling should also help their non-living allies (because surely even an evil gods wants its minions to be successful in their missions!); or possibly harm their god’s enemies while helping their allies.
Or- perhaps even better- the healing aspect of a good clerics heals only good allies (or heals neutral allies at a lesser effect), while an evil clerics’ healing would heal evil allies and neutral allies, but all opponents are blasted. Introducing a lesser effect for neutral allies of good clerics, but no lesser effect for neutral opponents of an evil cleric would be a worthwhile idea, IMO. (Ie. this introduces a reward for good PCs.)


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook Subscriber

I believe the problem to be that channeling energy should not be affecting ANY living targets. Undead should be affected because their source of survival is the negative plane, as should creatures of the positive plane should be inversely affected. Both are sensitive to these (deity enhanced) subtle bursts. But living creatures of the Prime Material Plane are surrounded and accustomed to the balance of positive and negative energies and so are not affected by these burst.

My argument also is because I think that MASS healing/infliction of wounds (on the living) should not be available at 1st level (as you need to have 9 caster levels to start this powerful of a spell.

I'm in favor of a positive bursts that (for good clerics) can do damage and cause negatively attuned creatures (undead) to flee ... and negative bursts that can attempt to control undead or cause them to pause (I think of this as a negative overload or a kind of blinding of undead who fail their will save) allowing the living to pass right by. In both cases interaction with fleeing or paused undead breaks this affect.

The flee or pausing effects would both last in rounds per level. To do more Healing and/or Infliction , casters should still rely on devoting slots to those spells.... as Caster level permits.


I agree with this :enhanced channel DIVINE ENERGY (not only positive/negative energy)by level not by feats.
At 1st lvl the cleric can channeling the align-power of this deity.

Ex: Lawful neutral cleric of a LN deity can channeled positive or negative energy(choice) AND LAWFUL energy against chaos outsiders(like axiomatic weapon but 1d6/2lvl;1=1d6;3=2d6....).
Number of use :3+cha mod./day for channel energy.

At higher level, cleric channel domain power,selective channel,ray of channel,heal same align outsiders(like undead with negative energy),etc......
feat :extra turning or..... +1 channeling energy (class feature choice)


A few last things and random thoughts:
Why should a deity who hasn't the healing domain in his portfolio allow his cleric to use positive energy channeling outside of combat? (You could consider channeling a plea for help from your deity and not something we do it when its convenient.) That is the one thing that makes positive channeling so damn good because a cleric doesn't need to invest into anything to make good use of it. As already mentioned above, a negative channeler must use his channel attempts in combat and thus absolutely needs to take the feat Selective Channeling and have a high charisma to boot.
To even the field a bit it might be a good idea to determine (part of) the healing dice through the clerics charisma bonus and let Selective Channeling or another feat) allow to swap d6 dice from damage to healing and vice versa(2d less damage -> 1d more healing). Of course that would possibly mean to tune the intial damage/healing effect back to 1/3 level.

Btw.:I am pretty sure the idea for the new channeling came from a certain feat(or alternate class feature, dunno exactly right now) and James Jacobs stellar PrC Apostle of the Green Lady.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook Subscriber
elghinn velkyn MASTER wrote:

I agree with this :enhanced channel DIVINE ENERGY (not only positive/negative energy)by level not by feats.

At 1st lvl the cleric can channeling the align-power of this deity.

Ex: Lawful neutral cleric of a LN deity can channeled positive or negative energy(choice) AND LAWFUL energy against chaos outsiders(like axiomatic weapon but 1d6/2lvl;1=1d6;3=2d6....).
Number of use :3+cha mod./day for channel energy.

At higher level, cleric channel domain power,selective channel,ray of channel,heal same align outsiders(like undead with negative energy),etc......
feat :extra turning or..... +1 channeling energy (class feature choice)

I like this! I also think the most important qualifier is the DEITY's alignment and not the character's alignment in supporting this ability.

Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Roleplaying Game / Design Forums / Open Comments / Channel energy - a plea for more versatility and less cliche All Messageboards
Recent threads in Open Comments