Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="howandwhy99" data-source="post: 5849098" data-attributes="member: 3192">Turning was not really about Undead. It was simply that the undead by default setting design were animations powered by otherworldly evil. Demons and Devils could be turned by good clerics as well because the cleric's good deity emanating through the cleric's holy symbol repelled them (though I believe they received a saving throw like intelligent undead (e.g. vampires). So Turning included all evil otherworldly creatures and those empowered by them. In return evil clerics could turn good-powered creatures like Devas and even Paladins. I think clerics could affect each other, but they might engage in a Cleric's duel. Also, the aspect of Controlling like-powered creatures worked both ways too.Turning was a rolled chance like a "to hit" roll, so it wasn't so much a limited resource as an ability. A character could Turn repeatedly each round, but there were often caveats. As with picking a lock *I believe* usually a failure could only be overturned on a specific target after more experience was gained, leveling basically.In the end what will matter for D&DN is what the designers understand clerics and their scope to be. Clerics were not primarily spellcasters originally, turning was a big part of how they interacted with the clerical system.Being an agent of a deity was a necessary Class trait and not optional. Calling upon the power of the deity was kind of a big deal. However divine spells were understood to be gained through prayer (calling the divine) too, so I see room for flexibility with alternate options even in the old default setting.Also, Turning did not mean the undead disappeared from the map. They could still be encountered later and remained a threat. Only threats significantly lower level than the cleric could be destroyed (or enthralled), so turning did not ruin undead and demon infested adventure modules.Binding, the big treasure here is not having spells cast upon the binder (a risky proposition at best), but information maps - a redundant phrase, I know. Powerful creatures were notoriously difficult to dominate or charm, binding or not. Trading of information via discussion can be much more interesting and lucrative, while still resulting in some major pitfalls if done poorly. Also, perhaps a magical or divine pact could be another kind of binding spell, perhaps best used after the first? Think of it like a Geas variant enchanting both parties with a saving throw each is expected to voluntary fail. By binding the caster as well the target the spell level could be lower and affect more powerful creatures earlier.</blockquote>

Verification