Turn Undead should be removed!

[JDJblatherings]

Well, in Third Edition, undead were not designed assuming the party had a cleric. According to Sean Reynolds, "The CR system regarding undead doesn't take into account turning. The CR of an undead is based on how much of a challenge it is if there is no turning available; the effect is that parties without a cleric can handle undead encounters (you don't need a cleric), but if you do have a cleric it makes these encounters a lot easier."

REALLY? Then why were the HD of undead ramped up to d12? They have a raft of immunities, can't be crited or whacked by a sneak attack unless one had feats that changed that. Some are tougher to turn (turn resistance). Seems to me the fact they could be turned was part of the design.


Turning is part of the game, it is one of those things that makes D&D, D&D. Get rid of it and we are playing D20 fantasy and not D&D. Sure the mechanics can be tweaked but turning is a defining element of the game.

 

[Lord Zardoz]

Seriously. I am not big on turning undead. It cheapens undead encounter IMO; its also annoying how every single ravenloft game that starts automatically has a cleric of pelor with the sun domain! The ability also makes little sense, especailly when you are playing a homebrew which has no deities.

Am I the only one who hopes turn undead is out of 4e?

The idea is good, since it is based on a reasonably well accepted trope, that Undead are an abomination that cannot stand before the light of truth or whatever.

The implementation is craptastic in 3rd edition. It is kind of hard to have a totally badass monster whose first action in combat is generally going to be to run away. You can mitigate this with some throwaway fodder, but because the ability is based on a d20 roll, and due to the uncertainty of Initiative, it is possible to put the cleric out of play before he can turn, leaving the players with a great deal more monsters to handle than the DM had planned on. With the game built around the combat system, its hard to create a compelling game experience built on running away.

END COMMUNICATION

 

[Greg K]

REALLY? Then why were the HD of undead ramped up to d12? They have a raft of immunities, can't be crited or whacked by a sneak attack unless one had feats that changed that. Some are tougher to turn (turn resistance). Seems to me the fact they could be turned was part of the design.


Turning is part of the game, it is one of those things that makes D&D, D&D. Get rid of it and we are playing D20 fantasy and not D&D. Sure the mechanics can be tweaked but turning is a defining element of the game.

Hey, don't ask me. I simply quoted SKR, one of the designers. He says they were not designed with the assumption of a cleric. I'll take his word, because he was working for WOTC at the time.

 

[JDJblatherings]

Hey, don't ask me. I simply quoted SKR, one of the designers. He says they were not designed with the assumption of a cleric. I'll take his word, because he was working for WOTC at the time.

I assumed 3.x was designed about a party of 4 characters of roughly equal level that would most likely contain a cleric, a fighter, a rogue and an arcane caster.

 

[kennew142]

REALLY? Then why were the HD of undead ramped up to d12? They have a raft of immunities, can't be crited or whacked by a sneak attack unless one had feats that changed that. Some are tougher to turn (turn resistance). Seems to me the fact they could be turned was part of the design.


Turning is part of the game, it is one of those things that makes D&D, D&D. Get rid of it and we are playing D20 fantasy and not D&D. Sure the mechanics can be tweaked but turning is a defining element of the game.

Regarding your first point, I don't think that the d12 hit points compensate for the lack of a CON bonus to hit points. I've generally found undead to be low hp critters compared to other creatures of their CR. The bad BAB (except for templated fighter types) also makes them weaker than other melee opponents. The immunities, especially to sneak attack and critical hits beefs them up a little bit, but I've still found them to be pretty weak opponents overall.

On your second point, I agree 100%. This is one of those areas that IMO cannot be changed. Not only is turning undead iconically D&D, it is part of the lore regarding the undead. The concept must remain in the game. I am hopeful, given the snippets we've had thus far, that 4e turning will better capture the flavor of what turning should be much better than any previous edition.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

In history, many folks had some clerical training.

Definitely- my Grandfather included!

All around the world, monestaries and cloisters have been a major source of education, a means of escape from abject poverty or an unfavorable inheritance position, and, in some cases, a place to retire from military or government service.

 

[ruleslawyer]

REALLY? Then why were the HD of undead ramped up to d12?

Mostly because they don't have a Con bonus, actually. You'll note that in many cases, undead still require bonus hp to be survivable without an absurd number of HD; thus the unholy toughness ability.

Turning is part of the game, it is one of those things that makes D&D, D&D. Get rid of it and we are playing D20 fantasy and not D&D. Sure the mechanics can be tweaked but turning is a defining element of the game.

I disagree. Turning is one of the most boring and wonky subsystems in the game. It was insanely powerful in 1e/2e, and now is just... well, weird. I'd prefer a more generalized suite of divine powers that includes something along the lines of being able to hold undead at bay, exorcise spirits, banish outsiders, etc... but the spell system arguably can handle that.

In the elocator and arcane trickster's case, it's rather the opposite. They don't want the player tapping into the existing power source. They don't elocators getting more than one D-door or arcane tricksters doing ranged ledgerdemain all the time thanks to some magic item that can cast mage hand at will.

And yet this seems like a mere wishing without any justification. If the elocater can cast more than one teleport, how can it be broken for him to get more than one d-door? Likewise, I'd love to see someone break the arcane trickster by allowing him to use Open Locks or Disable Device with mage hand even if he has a wand or constant item of the spell. I think simplicity should trump needless worry over unidentified balance concerns, no?

 

[kennew142]

I disagree. Turning is one of the most boring and wonky subsystems in the game. It was insanely powerful in 1e/2e, and now is just... well, weird. I'd prefer a more generalized suite of divine powers that includes something along the lines of being able to hold undead at bay, exorcise spirits, banish outsiders, etc... but the spell system arguably can handle that.

I don't care whether the spell system is used to model the power, or there is a divine channeling talent tree - so long as the concept of turning is kept in the game. I have seen it done with spells and it works just fine.

 

[ruleslawyer]

Well, sure. I think the concept of turning is quite important. It's more a question to me of the implementation (across all editions from Basic to 3.5). Turning actually strikes me as practically the poster boy for why a new edition isn't such a bad idea. I have to imagine that if Messrs. Collins and Noonan had included a "behind the curtain" for [Divine] feats in DotF, it would have discussed those feats as having been written in order to resolve the problems of a) needing something to do with Extra Turning; b) clerics and paladins having an ability that just sat around useless in non-undead encounters, or in encounters with higher-HD undead like zombies, etc.; and c) paladins (especially) finding turning much less useful than just having something to boost their overall combat effectiveness. It's exactly this sort of poorly-implemented rule plus post hoc workaround that's caused 3e's rules bloat.

I guess we really don't know what the cleric will look like at all right now, but I'd love to see a scenario in which either a) prayers will handle the "turning" mechanic; or b) one of the cleric's "at will" power suites will have something to do with holding at bay/exorcising/banishing undead/spirits/outsiders, based on a nice simple Will attack mechanic.

 

[kennew142]

Well, sure. I think the concept of turning is quite important. It's more a question to me of the implementation (across all editions from Basic to 3.5). Turning actually strikes me as practically the poster boy for why a new edition isn't such a bad idea. I have to imagine that if Messrs. Collins and Noonan had included a "behind the curtain" for [Divine] feats in DotF, it would have discussed those feats as having been written in order to resolve the problems of a) needing something to do with Extra Turning; b) clerics and paladins having an ability that just sat around useless in non-undead encounters, or in encounters with higher-HD undead like zombies, etc.; and c) paladins (especially) finding turning much less useful than just having something to boost their overall combat effectiveness. It's exactly this sort of poorly-implemented rule plus post hoc workaround that's caused 3e's rules bloat.

I guess we really don't know what the cleric will look like at all right now, but I'd love to see a scenario in which either a) prayers will handle the "turning" mechanic; or b) one of the cleric's "at will" power suites will have something to do with holding at bay/exorcising/banishing undead/spirits/outsiders, based on a nice simple Will attack mechanic.

I agree and agree.

The mechanism for turning has always been bad in D&D. Given my preferences, turning would be either an at will or per encounter ability (depending on how it works). I wouldn't necessarily make it something that all clerics have (in fact I'm hoping that we see very little of that for any class), but rather a talent/power that clerics can take. It would be even better if other classes can pick up the ability through the cleric training feat. This would simulate the true faith requirement for turning, as seen in literature/film.

The OP seems to be suggesting that the very concept of turning undead be removed from the game. I can't support such a suggestion.