Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions, OSR, & D&D Variants
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
L&L Turning & Churning
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Alphastream" data-source="post: 5848414" data-attributes="member: 11365"><p>Whether Turn Undead works well is linked to the way undead monsters work in D&D Next. It wasn't such a big deal in Basic and AD&D to turn away some number of skeletons when they were all the same. It was further less of an issue if turning required actions on further rounds to sustain (as in AD&D). A cleric might focus on turning, making the battle easier. In addition, because undead were often fleeing, they could come back. And, because the system often had many foes (look at some of those encounter tables for undead!), it worked fairly well without breaking anything. Plus, a broken encounter wasn't a big deal in these editions - you might have 5-10 fights in a gaming session.</p><p></p><p>It was in 3E where I felt turning undead really broke. Fights often had a smaller number of undead per encounter (and fewer encounters in an adventuring day - often 3) and the strength of turning (especially since it could be boosted and then really broken with Radiant Servants) could mean that a fight with a cleric was a cakewalk while one without a cleric was a severe challenge. We have to add spells like Sunburst to the consideration, as these also contributed to the lack of balance around encounters with undead. The overall result was often a feeling that the game was on too much of a teeter-totter. You saw DMs try to reverse-engineer encounters, add turn resistance, and so on. Anytime DMs are competing with players it is a bad sign that the mechanic works poorly.</p><p></p><p>4E was a bit better in most cases, primarily because turn undead was an encounter power and a cleric wasn't as omnipresent. In fact, at this point a cleric is rare due to the game having many types of leaders. Turn Undead remains strong (and there are varieties such as from the Invoker) and can certainly hurt an encounter. 4E continues the 3E progression: fewer encounters per day (3 is typical, but 1 is fairly common) mean the power has a lot of strength to define a gaming session. Fewer monsters means a few turned undead define how the battle plays out. Monsters having roles means the encounter can easily lose balance - the encounter design might hinge on the melee brute holding back PCs while the artillery rains death from afar. </p><p></p><p>In looking at Turn Undead for D&D Next I want to know what monsters and encounters look like. A few super-cool monsters as in 4E? Does initiative and controlling combat matter as much as in 3E? Many simple/boring monsters of one type as in earlier editions? This will really dictate the power of Turn Undead.</p><p></p><p>Ideally, Turning is an option that is useful but not encounter-shattering. Holding foes back while costing actions, with the number of targets based on the edition, is pretty good. As Mike Mearls points out, I don't think we need to add damage, though low damage works fairly well in a 4E action economy (where most powers deal some damage so you get a strong sense of contribution). Turn Undead likely doesn't need to get complicated - I don't want to see Turn Resistance, a broken Radiant Servant option, or to have to look things up to resolve combat. Ideally a simple ability-check roll against defense and we have our situation, then perhaps a save or the cleric must continue to sustain with a standard action (or both?). </p><p></p><p>A common system of weaknesses that monsters have (and in the case of undead, would be related to cleric abilities) could work, as Dave Chalker mentioned. It could encourage really fun interactions - you spend a round cleaning the once-holy altar so the weakness comes into play or you buy holy water. But, I would want to see this be really simple. I don't want monster stat blocks to resemble the pages of information we had in AD&D. Ideally it is comparable to the Resistances and Vulnerability entry on a 4E monster.</p><p></p><p>Overall and most importantly, encounter design and a DM's amount of work to prepare an adventure should not hinge on the presence of a cleric. Turn Undead should simply not be that powerful or this aspect of the game will play poorly.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Alphastream, post: 5848414, member: 11365"] Whether Turn Undead works well is linked to the way undead monsters work in D&D Next. It wasn't such a big deal in Basic and AD&D to turn away some number of skeletons when they were all the same. It was further less of an issue if turning required actions on further rounds to sustain (as in AD&D). A cleric might focus on turning, making the battle easier. In addition, because undead were often fleeing, they could come back. And, because the system often had many foes (look at some of those encounter tables for undead!), it worked fairly well without breaking anything. Plus, a broken encounter wasn't a big deal in these editions - you might have 5-10 fights in a gaming session. It was in 3E where I felt turning undead really broke. Fights often had a smaller number of undead per encounter (and fewer encounters in an adventuring day - often 3) and the strength of turning (especially since it could be boosted and then really broken with Radiant Servants) could mean that a fight with a cleric was a cakewalk while one without a cleric was a severe challenge. We have to add spells like Sunburst to the consideration, as these also contributed to the lack of balance around encounters with undead. The overall result was often a feeling that the game was on too much of a teeter-totter. You saw DMs try to reverse-engineer encounters, add turn resistance, and so on. Anytime DMs are competing with players it is a bad sign that the mechanic works poorly. 4E was a bit better in most cases, primarily because turn undead was an encounter power and a cleric wasn't as omnipresent. In fact, at this point a cleric is rare due to the game having many types of leaders. Turn Undead remains strong (and there are varieties such as from the Invoker) and can certainly hurt an encounter. 4E continues the 3E progression: fewer encounters per day (3 is typical, but 1 is fairly common) mean the power has a lot of strength to define a gaming session. Fewer monsters means a few turned undead define how the battle plays out. Monsters having roles means the encounter can easily lose balance - the encounter design might hinge on the melee brute holding back PCs while the artillery rains death from afar. In looking at Turn Undead for D&D Next I want to know what monsters and encounters look like. A few super-cool monsters as in 4E? Does initiative and controlling combat matter as much as in 3E? Many simple/boring monsters of one type as in earlier editions? This will really dictate the power of Turn Undead. Ideally, Turning is an option that is useful but not encounter-shattering. Holding foes back while costing actions, with the number of targets based on the edition, is pretty good. As Mike Mearls points out, I don't think we need to add damage, though low damage works fairly well in a 4E action economy (where most powers deal some damage so you get a strong sense of contribution). Turn Undead likely doesn't need to get complicated - I don't want to see Turn Resistance, a broken Radiant Servant option, or to have to look things up to resolve combat. Ideally a simple ability-check roll against defense and we have our situation, then perhaps a save or the cleric must continue to sustain with a standard action (or both?). A common system of weaknesses that monsters have (and in the case of undead, would be related to cleric abilities) could work, as Dave Chalker mentioned. It could encourage really fun interactions - you spend a round cleaning the once-holy altar so the weakness comes into play or you buy holy water. But, I would want to see this be really simple. I don't want monster stat blocks to resemble the pages of information we had in AD&D. Ideally it is comparable to the Resistances and Vulnerability entry on a 4E monster. Overall and most importantly, encounter design and a DM's amount of work to prepare an adventure should not hinge on the presence of a cleric. Turn Undead should simply not be that powerful or this aspect of the game will play poorly. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
L&L Turning & Churning
Top