Is radiant damage classed as normal damage?

[Destil]

Various damage types have their various niches. Some are overall better (radiant) or worse (poison) in the sense that they are more or less resisted by monsters in general.

...

There are specific feat paths that work well with specific damage types too, like frostcheese (Wintertouched and Lasting Frost). Its hard to say which types overall are "best". Radiant in isolation is probably better than the others, but remember that radiant powers take this into account (or should at least) and are presumably overall a bit weaker.

Unless I've missed something radiant has the worst energy kicker feat (it's nice but epic level and only on a crit). While there's some good general feat support for it in Divine Power, nothing you can do with it is on par with Psychic Lock or Resounding Thunder. Fire likewise isn't that great (no ongoing damage on a crit feat? Really?) but it's pretty easy to burn through resistance with it. Psychic is most likely the strongest overall, being rarely resisted and having a fantastic support feat.

 

[Jhaelen]

As others have pointed out, there's some balancing effects going on that help out with this. That, and many powers have rider effects in addition to the typed damage.

Yep, I know. But that knowledge is part of game mastery because the PHB doesn't explain this to new players.

There was a damage resistance chart for the MM1 on EnWorld awhile back that broke it down, and if IIRC it went something along the lines of Force/Psychic, then Acid, Radiant, Thunder, Cold, Lightning, Fire, Poison, Necrotic? Or something like that...

Yep, Force and Psychic turned out to be on top because very MM1 monster had resistance/immunity against it. I don't think it took into account, how many monsters are vulnerable to radiant.
Imho, a party without a reliable way to deal radiant damage will be at a serious disadvantage. Obviously, it will be specific to a campaign, just _how_ much of a disadvantage it is. The DM may even completely negate the disadvantage by never using any monsters that are vulnerable to a particular kind of energy damage. Still, I feel, most campaigns will use undead at some point. They're very popular and in certain environments the only kind of monster that make any sense - besides constructs.

What I would have liked to see is a short paragraph in the PHB, pinpointing the differences between energy types. It's important information for players when they decide on a character concept, imho.

As a passing note, the sorcerer is currently my favorite class because they can make their targets vulnerable to their chosen energy type. That's just awesome! You no longer have to consider what foes you might face, just blast away with your favorite powers!

 

[CapnZapp]

As a passing note, the sorcerer is currently my favorite class because they can make their targets vulnerable to their chosen energy type. That's just awesome! You no longer have to consider what foes you might face, just blast away with your favorite powers!

I would say a big part of why that is awesome is that not everybody can do it all the time!