D&D General Which edition did Turn Undead the best?

[Li Shenron]

I like formulas more than having to consult tables, so not the OD&D/AD&D versions for me.

I also don't like Turn Undead to end up being just another damage, so not the 4e version either.

That leaves the 3e and 5e versions... I'm fine with both but maybe the 3e version feels a bit more unique due to the "turning damage" mechanics instead of the standard save for each target.

 

[AlexofBarbaria]

5e. It works most clearly with the central mechanics of the game.

Yeah, just making it a saving throw for the undead is nice. 5e's approach is the only one I could run from memory without referencing the rules. There's a lot of value in that!

I like the OED Expanded rule.

• Banish the Unhallowed: Present the relic & recite the liturgy of life & death

1d6 + (Cleric Level – 5) = highest Hit Die of Undead that must flee or cower while liturgy continues. 2d6 creatures are affected (lowest Hit Die first). If Cleric’s level 4 more than Undead Hit Dice, it is destroyed;

That's a nice attempt to convert the original table into a formula. It's pretty rough on the Cleric though! The best undead HD they can affect is their level + 1, and the spread is centered well below their level. 1d6 + level – 4 is actually a better match to the table at most levels. Also easier to remember since it's the same number as the gap needed between level and HD to destroy rather than turn.

My other concern is it doesn't account for the progression slowing down at level 9+ (in the expanded AD&D table). E.g. level 13 Clerics aren't supposed to automatically destroy 9 HD vampires.

That name level step change appears in a lot of places in the classic system math, making it tough to convert tables into formulae.

I like formulas more than having to consult tables, so not the OD&D/AD&D versions for me.

I also don't like Turn Undead to end up being just another damage, so not the 4e version either.

That leaves the 3e and 5e versions... I'm fine with both but maybe the 3e version feels a bit more unique due to the "turning damage" mechanics instead of the standard save for each target.

I'm with you, I'd prefer to not use tables and for turning to feel unique.

0e-3e have a two roll model where the first roll determines whether the turning is effective at all, and the second roll determines the magnitude of the effect (how many creatures/HD are turned).

The two role model provides some tactical wrinkles that are lost in 5e. Because the turning effect can be "soaked up" by weaker types, it might be wise to knock them off first before attempting to turn.

3e Turning affects undead in order of proximity to the Cleric, which is even more interesting. Low level fodder will usually be in front of the higher level leader type in a mixed encounter, but the Cleric might be able to maneuver around and Turn the leader first by blasting them up close. That's cool.

 

[Zaukrie]

5e. Everything else is too fiddly.

If I had my way though, not every cleric would have this for channel divinity. But the idea clerics of different gods do different things isn't much of a thing in 5e.

 

[Weiley31]

I honestly like how Dolmenwood(OSE) does it.

But I also like 5E as well where it can destroy Undead of a certain CR.

 

[el-remmen]

I liked the mechanic/table for 3E the best and used it for various other channel divinity powers that weren't turning undead for homebrew "specialty priests."

 

[sevenbastard]

Turn undead, especially in older versions of D&D, can make a break the difficulty of an encounter. You have a cleric, easy peasy, you don't have a cleric total party kill.

One of rhe many reasons I think all D&D works better without clerics.

 

[Voadam]

I liked that it was unlimited in Moldvay Basic and gave the cleric something special they could do against some common monsters at level 1 where they got no spells and had lower HD and less weapon choices than a fighter. The blasting of a couple skeletons each round in a horde the party faces is a cool image. It was a cool unique distinguishing class feature. I also liked the image of trying to turn a bigger undead and the juice not coming a bunch but it being an option each round instead of a resource management pool judgment call the way spells were. The biggest downside was accommodating new undead as the chart was not straight HD based. The 2d6 HD worth of turning is a minimum 1 so it still hit a single target effect once you started facing wraiths and such.

In later 3.5 and pathfinder I liked the alternative of turning doing damage instead being generally a lower level undead only applicable power. While I did not care for the resource management pool of turning or HD effect limitation with inflated undead HD, they did allow a lot of fine tuning options either trading in turning or basing domain type powers on them to allow a lot of cleric mechanical differentiation to hit a lot of themes based on the god/divine forces which was kind of nice since AD&D and 3e clerics were much more about the individual god/divine force thematics instead of one set for the class.

 

[UngeheuerLich]

5.5: you deals radiant damage equal to your wisdom modifier.

I principally like it. I would have liked it even more if the damage was half cleric level. I think wisdom modifier does not scale well enough. With half cleric level (rounded up) you start at 3d8 and it goes up to 10d8. Which I prefer.

 

[Oofta]

I've never cared for turn undead as a whole, it's far too swingy and makes setting up challenging encounters with undead a pain in the ass.

Have a zombie swarm? Do I need to decide what percentage is going to be turned? What happens if the cleric just happened to have used their channel divinity on something else and doesn't have the channel divinity when I expected it? There's always going to be a certain level of uncertainty where AOEs are concerned but no other AOE at the level that turn undead comes online will regularly turn a deadly encounter into an easy encounter if I just happen to roll bad for team undead.

So while I like the 5E.24 because it lets you deal damage to those you don't turn, I actually prefer the 4E rules. In 4E the result is damage and an effect that is useful but doesn't have the chance to effectively eliminate every enemy in the encounter. It makes it a lot easier to plan.

 

[DragonLancer]

I prefer the D20/Pathfinder version. The rules are simpler and easy to understand. No fiddly tables.