1. It was to powerful in the beta
2. The run like a girl has always blown. It made undead encounter with a cleric about 1/2 the normal CR
3. Channel works great you damage undead and can outright dust ones at high level
4. If ya want the classic run like a girl ability ya can always still get it
Other then that I may be missing some points
Didn't you hear? Pathfinder hates clerics? :)
It is far more powerful then it was in 3.5 and usable every single game not just for the odd undead you run across. Sure ya have to have a feat to make em run but you can area bust the lot of em. Make em dust
I am hoping there is a PFS scenario that has heavy use of middle level undead that cause several TPKs because no Cleric bothers to take the Turn Undead feat, since it is felt that damaging undead is far better.
|
Instead of making an ability (turn undead) only good against one creature type (undead) they provided an alternate ability in channel energy that is useful all the time (healing) and can also be used some of the time to harm undead instead.
They kept Turn Undead (along with alignment and elemental channeling) as a specialist option via feat selection, as it should be, since it certainly is a more focused effect on a single type of creature. This should be a character/campaign focus rather than a core feature for a class.
|
Instead of making an ability (turn undead) only good against one creature type (undead) they provided an alternate ability in channel energy that is useful all the time (healing) and can also be used some of the time to harm undead instead.
They kept Turn Undead (along with alignment and elemental channeling) as a specialist option via feat selection, as it should be, since it certainly is a more focused effect on a single type of creature. This should be a character/campaign focus rather than a core feature for a class.
This was quite an intelligent move. I look forward to this.
As far as qualifying for 3.5 classes I would allow it to count, but for pathfinder PrC's that come out later I would not because it is a different mechanic for them.
I think they went too far nerfing Channel Energy
1. The turn has been removed and is a feat
2. The save for the turn is way too low; everything makes it
3. You have to choose heal or damage now; this is the even bigger nerf
And turning smite is just sad. Decide to use it before you hit, and then they get the save anyway?
I played a cleric in Beta and I loved channeling for the heal/harm but it was extremely unusual for an undead foe with a CR anywhere around your level to miss that Will save. As a result I don't necessarily "miss" turn being taken out into a feat, but I think it's a wasted feat with that save on it. It's at best a 50% at low levels and it gets much worse with level.
Doing the math, if you're getting mobbed by a lot of little undead of CRs like 2 or less than you it's OK, but in general undead Will save is just about equal to CR, not to mention (at least in the d20 SRD, since the Bestiary's not out yet) many higher level undead get turn resistance on top of that!
Common scenario, APL 5 party with EL7 encounter, a spectre... It's rolling +9 vs your DC of 16. The differential gets worse as levels rise, as well.
|
|
I think they went too far nerfing Channel Energy
1. The turn has been removed and is a feat
2. The save for the turn is way too low; everything makes it
3. You have to choose heal or damage now; this is the even bigger nerfAnd turning smite is just sad. Decide to use it before you hit, and then they get the save anyway?
I played a cleric in Beta and I loved channeling for the heal/harm but it was extremely unusual for an undead foe with a CR anywhere around your level to miss that Will save. As a result I don't necessarily "miss" turn being taken out into a feat, but I think it's a wasted feat with that save on it. It's at best a 50% at low levels and it gets much worse with level.
I think the balance is just right myself.
Keep in mind that Turn Undead is no longer limited to a number of HD of undead, instead it effects ALL undead you can pack within a 30ft radius, not too shabby. DC looks right on par. A 6th level cleric with Cha 16 will have a DC 16 Will Save to resist. Thats approximately equivalent to say a 2nd or 3rd level spell DC. Sure, the big bad undead will likely save eventually but his two dozen zombie minions will be gone. I think this effect should have been bundled with the damage to undead however, given the feat expenditure.
I played a Beta cleric from 1st to 6th and played the final PF as a 7th Cleric. Separating the Heal/Harm simultaneous effect was just the right move to make it balanced. Taking down multiple undead creatures while simultaneously healing my party back up to full? It was a bit much.
I agree Turning Smite is a bit lackluster. It only combines the standard action of the channel with an attack to do together against undead only. and its wasted on a miss. Pass.
I think the balance is just right myself.Keep in mind that Turn Undead is no longer limited to a number of HD of undead, instead it effects ALL undead you can pack within a 30ft radius, not too shabby. DC looks right on par. A 6th level cleric with Cha 16 will have a DC 16 Will Save to resist. Thats approximately equivalent to say a 2nd or 3rd level spell DC. Sure, the big bad undead will likely save eventually but his two dozen zombie minions will be gone. I think this effect should have been bundled with the damage to undead however, given the feat expenditure.
I played a Beta cleric from 1st to 6th and played the final PF as a 7th Cleric. Separating the Heal/Harm simultaneous effect was just the right move to make it balanced. Taking down multiple undead creatures while simultaneously healing my party back up to full? It was a bit much.
I agree Turning Smite is a bit lackluster. It only combines the standard action of the channel with an attack to do together against undead only. and its wasted on a miss. Pass.
Sure, but the thing is, the raw damage will take out his zombie minions whether they are "turned" or not. Since channeling both damages and turns, the turning part of the effect is much more useful against stuff the damage hasn't killed anyway. And they all get saves to halve the damage, too - I don't know if that's "balanced" or not, but I know it's "lots of annoying work to determine if they take another 6 points of damage or not."
I could agree with having Channel just do healing, and then use a Turn Undead feat to have it damage (no save) and turn. (Though I've never been a fan of the run-away effect, I'd much prefer that they just can't approach or cower or something).
I think Turning Smite just needs the save removed, like just about every touch spell in the game. Then it'd be fine.
I am hoping there is a PFS scenario that has heavy use of middle level undead that cause several TPKs because no Cleric bothers to take the Turn Undead feat, since it is felt that damaging undead is far better.
The 5th books of Curse of Crimson Throne is an gigantic dungeon with only undeads inside ! LOL ! This night we're going to begin this adventure and my players wish to use the new rules, LOL !!!!!!
|
|
I am hoping there is a PFS scenario that has heavy use of middle level undead that cause several TPKs because no Cleric bothers to take the Turn Undead feat, since it is felt that damaging undead is far better.The 5th books of Curse of Crimson Throne is an gigantic dungeon with only undeads inside ! LOL ! This night we're going to begin this adventure and my players wish to use the new rules, LOL !!!!!!
I'm DMing Scarwall at the moment. It's challenging, but it's not overwhelming without being able to make the undead run away. Of course, my party features a Cleric with the Glory and Sun Domains, a Paladin with a Ghost Touch weapon (and thanks to the spirit boon Ghost touch Full Plate *sobs*) and a multiclass Ranger with Favoured Enemy Undead and (from the same Spirit Boon) an undead bane quarterstaff. Between the three of them and a Wizard with Disrupt Undead, Improved Disrupt Undead and Undeath to Death all regularly prepared, it might just be that I've got possibly the best prepared party for this particular part of the AP.
I'm DMing Scarwall at the moment. It's challenging, but it's not overwhelming
You're group seems really well prepared. In my case...the cleric is going to be good (Sarenrae), and after it's a sorcerer with "few" destructives spells, a fighter with a greatsword (very strong), a rogue (who is going to be able to sneak undeads for his pleasure) and a Irori Monk. I wish for them to use their wisdow, LOL !!!
Doing the math, if you're getting mobbed by a lot of little undead of CRs like 2 or less than you it's OK, but in general undead Will save is just about equal to CR, not to mention (at least in the d20 SRD, since the Bestiary's not out yet) many higher level undead get turn resistance on top of that!
Common scenario, APL 5 party with EL7 encounter, a spectre... It's rolling +9 vs your DC of 16. The differential gets worse as levels rise, as well.
You are making some assumptions with your math. You are assuming the typical Cleric build. If you want to be good at channeling energy, you've got to specialize in it like anything else.
My new character that I get to start playing this week channels negative energy. He's got a 20 CHA to start plus Improved Turning. That's a DC 18 at level 2 and the DC goes up one every two levels after. Plus, as long as the DM doesn't have an issue with it, I can take Ability Focus to boost the DC up two more. At level 8, assuming that I put my 2 points in CHA and have a Cloak of CHA +2, I could have a DC 25 WIL save against my channel and probably Control Undead. Unless you have a +6 or more, you're in natural 20 land.
You are assuming that it gets worse as you level up. In my case, it'll get better and better. Those power house undead will need that turn resistance to have a fighting chance to not fall under my control.
It could work the same way for turning. You could specialize in being the parties healbot and be feared by undead.
By the way, my character isn't really the travel with undead type of guy. He is looking to punk down some vampires though. Sweatness.
|
|
I am hoping there is a PFS scenario that has heavy use of middle level undead that cause several TPKs because no Cleric bothers to take the Turn Undead feat,
are those the mid level undead with the insane HD in 3.5 that no cleric could turn succesfully anyways? or are you talking about some other undead that I never encountered?
I am hoping there is a PFS scenario that has heavy use of middle level undead that cause several TPKs because no Cleric bothers to take the Turn Undead feat,are those the mid level undead with the insane HD in 3.5 that no cleric could turn succesfully anyways? or are you talking about some other undead that I never encountered?
Ahh...
I guess you don't have faith that Paizo will do undead right?
I don't blame you.
As for me, I'm glad I won't have undead running all over my map. Off the edge of the map. Off the edge of the table. Tracking them all over the dungeon.
Now we need to fix Fear so my non-undead monsters won't do it either. And the PCs won't.
Still, I would have preferred to turn "run away" into "cower and be shaken" or something. Apply penalties rather than running off the edge of the table (or running into the next roomful of monsters).
Had we done that, then channel energy could have retained the fear aspect and it would have been perfect.
3. You have to choose heal or damage now; this is the even bigger nerf
That part I don't like, either, and have promptly houseruled it.
It doesn't make sense. Channel energy is like using positive/negative energy. So let it be like using energy.
As for me, I'm glad I won't have undead running all over my map. Off the edge of the map. Off the edge of the table. Tracking them all over the dungeon.
Agreed. Most annoying ability ever.
I am not sure I would consider this a nerf. Undead running away from the party and possibly alerting more monsters/NPCs deeper in the dungeon was always a pain in the ass.
At least you used to flat out destroy undead that were half your hit die or lower. That was nice for taking out Zombies and Skeletons. Of course now you'll just channel and destroy them that way. I'm not really sure what the point of Turn Undead is anymore. I don't really see people using it now. At least Command Undead is like having a Dominate Monster that works on undead. That one is a little more useful.
Ooo, hello Sacred Conduit. Just what the channeling specialist was looking for. Fits my background perfectly too. :)
|
|
3. You have to choose heal or damage now; this is the even bigger nerf
That part I don't like, either, and have promptly houseruled it.
It doesn't make sense. Channel energy is like using positive/negative energy. So let it be like using energy.
Well it all depends on how you see it. To me the way I see it now is instead of a burst of channel energy that flows out from the cleric hitting everything within 30 ft which is the way I saw it in the beta. In the final I see it as the cleric or paladin's god/what have you opening up a direct channel of positive/negative energy either in all living things in the area, or all dead things. So it doesn't bother me at all, because I can envision it working either way. And the newer version is more balanced.
|
|
I am hoping there is a PFS scenario that has heavy use of middle level undead that cause several TPKs because no Cleric bothers to take the Turn Undead feat,are those the mid level undead with the insane HD in 3.5 that no cleric could turn succesfully anyways? or are you talking about some other undead that I never encountered?Ahh...
I guess you don't have faith that Paizo will do undead right?
I don't blame you.
Actually I assume they'll do them right and therefor the undead will be balanced based off the assumption that the clerics are channeling instead of turning. You're the one assuming that the new undead will be unbalanced in a way that the only way to survive encountering them is to make them run. Which is funny because if the complaint is that the undead make the saves and only take the half damage, wouldn't the same undead be making the saves and not run off. Either way the assumption is for me that the undead will be balanced so that either option is viable. And so an encounter where you need turn undead but channel wouldn't work isn't one that makes any sense to me.
|
|
Common scenario, APL 5 party with EL7 encounter, a spectre... It's rolling +9 vs your DC of 16. The differential gets worse as levels rise, as well.
That means the spectre needs a 7 or better on the die to succeed, which is a 30% chance of successfully turning the spectre.
Compare against the same Cha 16, 5th level cleric in 3.5: needs a total of 22 on the turning check, with +3 (Cha) and +2 (Know: religion) for a total of +5. That means the cleric needs a 17 or better on the roll, a 20% chance of successfully turning the spectre.
This is not a nerf.
As a DM I kinda like the removal of the Turn Undead effect. I hate dealing with the "runaway" part of fear and similar effects. It's just a pain, particularly with battlemaps.
I've recently started using Heroes of Horror's fear rules to limit the running away.
I am hoping there is a PFS scenario that has heavy use of middle level undead that cause several TPKs because no Cleric bothers to take the Turn Undead feat, since it is felt that damaging undead is far better.
I doubt that will happen. If the fight is to hard for a party with a cleric and the new channel energy, it would probably be impossible for a party without a cleric.
You're the one assuming that the new undead will be unbalanced in a way that the only way to survive encountering them is to make them run.
No I'm not.
Which is funny because if the complaint is that the undead make the saves and only take the half damage, wouldn't the same undead be making the saves and not run off.
I've never made such complaint.
And so an encounter where you need turn undead but channel wouldn't work isn't one that makes any sense to me.
Then we agree on that.
|
|
Remember Undead have gone back to d8 for hitpoints..that makes a difference too.With the average skellie having 4 hp that means you should clear a bunch of them with a couple of channels even at 1st level.
Plus you need to take into account that it's easier to damage the buggers as well..magic weapons doing half damage on a hit against incorporeal types and corporeal types being subject to crits and sneak attack should change the balance of undead encounters a lot
Ahh...I guess you don't have faith that Paizo will do undead right?
I don't blame you.
Wow.
eh he is just upset ya didn't use his houserules is all.
I am hoping there is a PFS scenario that has heavy use of middle level undead that cause several TPKs because no Cleric bothers to take the Turn Undead feat,are those the mid level undead with the insane HD in 3.5 that no cleric could turn succesfully anyways? or are you talking about some other undead that I never encountered?Ahh...
I guess you don't have faith that Paizo will do undead right?
I don't blame you.
Please - I've yet to see very many encounters "as written" that legitimately threaten a TPK except to the unfortunate and the stupid.
Doesn't mean they're not out there - but they are hardly the norm.
Before you blast PRPG undead - get the stat blocks first. The allip from the bonus beastiary is managable by all but those whom the dice hose - especially by a 3rd level party.
Instead of making an ability (turn undead) only good against one creature type (undead) they provided an alternate ability in channel energy that is useful all the time (healing) and can also be used some of the time to harm undead instead.
They kept Turn Undead (along with alignment and elemental channeling) as a specialist option via feat selection, as it should be, since it certainly is a more focused effect on a single type of creature. This should be a character/campaign focus rather than a core feature for a class.
Well-said.
Wow.
Ahh...I guess you don't have faith that Paizo will do undead right?
I don't blame you.
I ran two adventures at the very first Paizo event and both had undead encounters. I'm going wow right along with Josh.
Back to the other points made, I can say that the parties with 3.5 clerics just walked through those encounters with no suspense, no challenge whatsoever, and the parties without clerics had decent fights without any danger of TPK.
People used to undead running away and being eviscerated by the AoO's or exploded by the special feats will be disappointed, but rogues aren't useless against undead anymore, so that should balance out. I'm sort of doubting anyone who played a cleric in 3.5 can boast that they turned Strahd in Castle Ravenloft and can't do that now.
I ran two adventures at the very first Paizo event and both had undead encounters. I'm going wow right along with Josh.
Yeah, dude. I wouldn't take much weight in that kind of negativity (no pun intended). I'm getting a VIBE here.
Anyways, I've trusted Paizo since the first time I ran Cauldron and they've never given me a reason not to trust them with my favorite pastime. I'm sure undead will be just fine.
:-D
I'm really enjoying how several people have taken my interaction with Lastknightleft out of context, and assume I'm blasting the new (unseen) undead, or even Paizo itself.
Well done. Very well done.
Laundry day isn't so boring any more.
|
|
You're the one assuming that the new undead will be unbalanced in a way that the only way to survive encountering them is to make them run.No I'm not.
I am hoping there is a PFS scenario that has heavy use of middle level undead that cause several TPKs because no Cleric bothers to take the Turn Undead feat,
You're right, how did I ever get that impression?
You're the one assuming that the new undead will be unbalanced in a way that the only way to survive encountering them is to make them run.No I'm not.I am hoping there is a PFS scenario that has heavy use of middle level undead that cause several TPKs because no Cleric bothers to take the Turn Undead feat,You're right, how did I ever get that impression?
Hell if I know.
But I'm not so arrogant as to make any assumptions on your thought process.
[
But I'm not so arrogant as to make any assumptions on your thought process.
Since your thought process is clear, I will reiterate: Paizo has done the best it can while saddled with 3.5. Pathfinder is not 3.5. It is more balanced from my point of view, but that's only based on limited playtest experience with people who've never played 3.5 and their reactions to the rules. You don't need to read into this or make any assumptions, I'm happy with Pathfinder and their modules so far, 3.5 and otherwise.
Other people may not agree. I ask that they wait to view the Pathfinder Bestiary before deciding that the cleric is less balanced. Since undead are not as powerful in Pathfinder(no more automatic d12's for hit dice, no matter how lame the zombie or vampire build), it's hard to really come down on Paizo for taking away the automatic turning. It's not as though low charisma clerics could do much with turning anyway. For those accustomed to having turning for their clerics, Pathfinder provides an extra feat(every other level instead of the slower progression). Hard to really miss it if you're reproducing the 3.5 experience.
I've playtested and look forward to playing some more Pathfinder based on my experiences so far. The proudest part of playtesting Pathfinder is seeing the things my players enjoyed become part of the core rules and watching the things they disliked revised into something more manageable(combat feats, Power Attack, etc). I look forward to seeing more reports from people who enjoyed the new cleric rules and even people who played them and found the role more challenging. 3.5 wasn't perfect and it's unlikely that Pathfinder will be, but I can safely say it's easier to run and the players continue to have fun.
Since your thought process is clear,
Is it?
If I'm reading your post correctly, you still aren't on the same page.
You're the one assuming that the new undead will be unbalanced in a way that the only way to survive encountering them is to make them run.No I'm not.I am hoping there is a PFS scenario that has heavy use of middle level undead that cause several TPKs because no Cleric bothers to take the Turn Undead feat,You're right, how did I ever get that impression?Hell if I know.
But I'm not so arrogant as to make any assumptions on your thought process.
Where is that line of arrogance anyways? Is there a chart on the interwebs somewhere I can reference for future conversations?
This thread needs a time out...
Agreed. I'll be in the corner, thinking about what I've done. = )