Midnight-Is it worth it?

[S'mon]

Well, it certainly is the first time I've seen a PC in a game of mine formulate a plan for taking over the world before she could be sure she'd live to 2nd level. Complete with long-term military strategy laid out and all that.

Naw, I'd already made 2nd level when I posted that!
I like to think big - maybe I think too big, but some players think a bit too small IMO ("Orcs! We must flee!") - hopefully Peter & me should balance out well!

Edit: Not _taking over_, _saving_ it...

 

[S'mon]

The channeler in my game doesn't seem to have a problem. Then again, he's only 2nd level yet.

He seems more powerful than a regular lvl 1 Wizard, about as good as a regular level 1 cleric. I read on the Midnight site the designers intended the Channeller to be stronger than Wizard at low levels, weaker at higher, so that its power gradient was more gradual. It seems fine to me - certainly the Channeller is currently more powerful than the party's Defender. His offensive power is at least as great as the party Fighters, and he can heal huge amounts of hit points (at a price), but he's defensively vulnerable, so the rest of us have to put a lot of effort into keeping him alive. Possibly his being an elf doesn't help. Good PC though.
I don't know how Channellers work out at higher levels, but it sounds as if they have decent survivability re hit points & armour, and can fight ok in extremis (3/4 BAB). They might not do too well in some Monte Cook meatgrinder but for the Midnight world I don't think they'd be underpowered.

 

[S'mon]

This is one of the things I'm getting at. Fighters with their feat trees become incredibly powerful at later levels...even without lots of magic weapons. But Channelers don't get very much. I mean, a 20th lvl channeler has no more spellcasting ability than a 20th lvl ranger or paladin in core D&D. Sure, he might be able to cast some higher level spells....but after those two high level spells, that's it....for the day.

This is a weird complaint. I think it's because the rather artificial dungeon-crawl 4-encounters-a-day paradigm is so deep-rooted in people's thinking about D&D. In most RPGs, more than one battle in a single day is pretty unusual. And the less frequent battles are, the more relatively powerful spellcasters get.

I think 3.5 moved away slightly from the 4-encounters dungeon crawl paradigm, which might be one reason Monte Cook complained about the nerfing of the hours-duration Buff spells (Bull's Strength etc). Midnight's assumptions seem a long way from Monte-style dungeoneering, but perfectly workable.

 

[StalkingBlue]

Naw, I'd already made 2nd level when I posted that!
I like to think big - maybe I think too big, but some players think a bit too small IMO ("Orcs! We must flee!") - hopefully Peter & me should balance out well!

Edit: Not _taking over_, _saving_ it...

2nd level, indeed. My apologies.

And you aren't plotting to take over my world, of course not. Merely to save it from me.

 

[S'mon]

And you aren't plotting to take over my world, of course not. Merely to save it from me.

LOL - you just need to keep slapping me down when I get out of line.

 

[Banshee16]

This is a weird complaint. I think it's because the rather artificial dungeon-crawl 4-encounters-a-day paradigm is so deep-rooted in people's thinking about D&D. In most RPGs, more than one battle in a single day is pretty unusual. And the less frequent battles are, the more relatively powerful spellcasters get.

I think 3.5 moved away slightly from the 4-encounters dungeon crawl paradigm, which might be one reason Monte Cook complained about the nerfing of the hours-duration Buff spells (Bull's Strength etc). Midnight's assumptions seem a long way from Monte-style dungeoneering, but perfectly workable.

Believe me....I run pretty far from a 4 battle a day type game Midnight isn't really the setting for that. But I look at the channeler's capabilities and see someone that's effective for a very short time. A fighter stays effective all day long.

Currently, I run Planescape, as I've run for about 4 years, and the characters have entire sessions that sometimes happen with no battles at all. But there are plenty uses of magic other than blowing stuff up.

A Channeler with a good primary score will have what....26 spell points by lvl 20? That goes away *very* quickly. A wizard or sorcerer has upwards of 180-200 "spell points" by that level.

Everyone that I've seen post about them talks about Channelers being good. But they are running characters at low levels...like level 2 or 3. What I'm interested in hearing is how well the Channeler compares when all the characters in the party are level 12?

Banshee

 

[S'mon]

Believe me....I run pretty far from a 4 battle a day type game Midnight isn't really the setting for that. But I look at the channeler's capabilities and see someone that's effective for a very short time. A fighter stays effective all day long.

In most non-D&D games I've run it's very rare for there to be more than one important event per day; and most games have spellcasting spell-point rules that allow only a very small number of powerful spells/day; eg if you cast one Wish you can't cast the 5 Fireballs. I've never seen this as a problem; it tends to add flavour and clearly demarcate the mages into the Merlin role (advice, support magic, occasional major interventions) rather than D&D-style Field Artillery. In most games you would only exceptionally get multiple combats in a single day, and the resulting wizard's vulnerability in the 3rd or 4th battle would be one of the major themes of the scenario - the equivalent in high-level D&D of using a Golem or Outsider with high SR to 'nerf' the spellcaster.

For all I know the Channeler may well be weak at high levels, but not being able to spellcast 'all day long' doesn't make it so. If a high level Fighter and a fully-charged Channeler have to fight a single battle without prep time, the Channeler should be able to contribute meaningfully. If they prep in advance, the Channeler ought to be a major factor. Outside combat the Channeler ought to be able to perform a variety of useful spellcasting. Being able to equal a fighter in damage output in the 10th or 20th round of battle that day isn't necessary IMO.

 

[Derulbaskul]

Also, skills are arguably more important in Midnight because straight-up combat is so damn deadly. Do you think that also helps make the channeler a more viable class?

 

[StalkingBlue]

LOL - you just need to keep slapping me down when I get out of line.

That's the plan.

 

[Ashrem Bayle]

In my opinion, the Channeler is a fine class. It has a GREAT selection of skills, which are far more important in Midnight than your average D&D game. They have the same BAB as a cleric, so they can handle themselves pretty well without spells. And then of course they have magic.

Yes, their spellcasting is limited. They can't cast even close to the number of high level spells per day that a Wizard can. However, they don't need to. If you average one combat per day, why would you need that many spells?

Midnight is a low-magic setting. You don't have characters that can cast dozens of high level spells in a low magic setting. The Channeler is better compaired to the Bard than the Wizard anyway. Midnight has nothing like the standard D&D Wizard class, and it doesn't need anything.