Cleric without turning: Options? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Cleric without turning: Options? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Keenath
07-15-06, 11:10 PM I'm considering a cleric for a new game coming up.

Now, I have two ideas for my cleric -- either a human cleric of Farlangn who travels and doesn't wear heavy armor (possibly using the Cloistered Cleric variant!), or a dwarven cleric.

Problem is, I loathe turning. Making undead flee is often counterproductive, and the ones that turn to dust are the ones that you could've whipped anyway with ordinary weapons. And Turning always takes too long to work out at the table anyway; I'd prefer something simpler.

So, I'm looking at what my options are.

Option 1: Divine feats
Probably the simplest option, mechanically -- if I don't like turning, I just don't turn. Take a divine feat or two and use them instead. I rather like Divine Vigor... As a dwarf in heavy armor, I don't get slowed down, so the +10 base speed brings me up to normal movement. I also think we don't get to use temp HP often enough; it's a neat mechanic. Downside, it costs a feat, and I still COULD turn if I wanted -- I'm ignoring a class feature.

Option 2: Turning Damage
This is the option in Complete Divine. This bypasses all the Turning Check rigamarole and makes it into a pretty simple operation: Declare you're turning, and deal 1d6 damage per cleric level to all undead in the area. If they have turn resistance, you subtract it just like DR or energy resistance. Easy.

Option 3: Champion Cleric
This is the option in the DMG/SRD section on Variant Character Classes. It suggests replacing Turning with the Smite Evil and Aura of Courage from the paladin.
Does this seem like overkill to anyone else? I'm not worried about stepping on the Paladin's toes, but this seems like a big benefit for giving up just Turning. Do you suppose they meant Smite Evil 1/day only (as opposed to the Paladin's progression)? Would it be more appropriate to get the progession of Smites but not the aura? Or is the book's suggestion just fine as written?

Which option do you think would be best?
Crinos
07-15-06, 11:25 PM You know, I like the sound of that turn damage thing. I might use that in a campaign if I ever start one.
Seerow
07-15-06, 11:30 PM I'm considering a cleric for a new game coming up.

Now, I have two ideas for my cleric -- either a human cleric of Farlangn who travels and doesn't wear heavy armor (possibly using the Cloistered Cleric variant!), or a dwarven cleric.

Problem is, I loathe turning. Making undead flee is often counterproductive, and the ones that turn to dust are the ones that you could've whipped anyway with ordinary weapons. And Turning always takes too long to work out at the table anyway; I'd prefer something simpler.

So, I'm looking at what my options are.

Option 1: Divine feats
Probably the simplest option, mechanically -- if I don't like turning, I just don't turn. Take a divine feat or two and use them instead. I rather like Divine Vigor... As a dwarf in heavy armor, I don't get slowed down, so the +10 base speed brings me up to normal movement. I also think we don't get to use temp HP often enough; it's a neat mechanic. Downside, it costs a feat, and I still COULD turn if I wanted -- I'm ignoring a class feature.

Option 2: Turning Damage
This is the option in Complete Divine. This bypasses all the Turning Check rigamarole and makes it into a pretty simple operation: Declare you're turning, and deal 1d6 damage per cleric level to all undead in the area. If they have turn resistance, you subtract it just like DR or energy resistance. Easy.

Option 3: Champion Cleric
This is the option in the DMG/SRD section on Variant Character Classes. It suggests replacing Turning with the Smite Evil and Aura of Courage from the paladin.
Does this seem like overkill to anyone else? I'm not worried about stepping on the Paladin's toes, but this seems like a big benefit for giving up just Turning. Do you suppose they meant Smite Evil 1/day only (as opposed to the Paladin's progression)? Would it be more appropriate to get the progession of Smites but not the aura? Or is the book's suggestion just fine as written?

Which option do you think would be best?

The books suggestion is fine. Compare that smite evil and aura to persisted Divine Power and Righteous Might through divine Metamagic.
ZinFeir
07-16-06, 04:58 AM In Races of the Stone, Dwarf Cleric race sub you loose Turn undead and gain Smite Giant.
IbanezNinja
07-16-06, 10:06 AM Just go with divine metamagic. You'll love those turn attempts when they are powering a persistant divine power or any other of your awesome buffs.
Keenath
07-16-06, 10:17 AM Okay, yeah, I should've said this to start: Divine Metamagic is cheese, and Divine Persistent is made by Kraft, because it's the cheesiest. I will not be doing that.

The books suggestion is fine. Compare that smite evil and aura to persisted Divine Power and Righteous Might through divine Metamagic.And that's why this comment doesn't hold any water for me. Compare a suggestion to an obviously broken combo? That doesn't tell me anything.
Dead_Karma
07-16-06, 02:17 PM i'm simply going to say that if you don't like the turning rules, i'd go for turning damage instead alot easier to figure. of course there is also the favored soul class they don't turn, but get to know their spells and cast them like a sorc also, course you have to be picky because if i remember right that means they have to know inflict, cure, or both types of spells depending on your preferance.
Beckett
07-18-06, 01:40 AM Turnning Undead is completely counterproductive to the game, and needs to be completely redone. Ravenloft has a nice rule for Turnning in that it does not matter if your HD are twice the Undeads. If you turn an undead, and it can not flee, (suchas being backed intoa corner), it is destroyed. The catch is that is the only time they are destroyed. A 20th level cleric still makes 2HD Zombies run in terror, not turning them to dust on the spot.

Alternanatevly, you might get rid of turning and simply give the Cleric a new Domain every 5th Cleric level, like a Wizards Bonus Feats.
Rerecros
07-18-06, 01:48 AM Oh thats just great, you're going to make clerics even more over-powered.
If you're going to loose turning, your going to have to replace it with an equally useless ability.
Beckett
07-18-06, 01:55 AM From years of playing them in many different ways, Clerics are the least "powerful" class. They get almost no useful skills, moderate spells, and they are most definetly not the best in combat. And hey, they aren't they only armored spellcasters out there anymore. Oh wait, that was since the DMG and Complete Warrior came out. Additional Domains simply grants them a better selection of prayers to serve the will of their deity with and to help protect save others daily, while the option for the modified Turning is much more risky, though it doesn't seem that way.
Keenath
07-18-06, 07:11 PM Re: "Turning is useless, so a replacement ability should be useless."

As I said to start the thread, turning IS often counterproductive, or allows you to quickly destroy enemies you could already quickly destroy. However, Divine feats, and Divine Metamagic in particular, make turning useful even if you never meet undead. Thus, a replacement ability should be given with the understanding that it's replacing both a useless ability and the opportunity to use any Divine feats.

Smite seems to be a good fit, actually, now that I've looked at it for a while. It's probably usable fewer times per day than turning would've been, and each use is only good against a single target. In addition, adding your level to damage is really not a very crushing power; what's 10 hp to a CR 10 creature? Practically nothing. And a minor bonus to hit on a single attack is nice, but not really a bit deal. Smite is a relatively minor boost a few times per day; not really breaking the cleric.

Now, second, the turning damage option (1d6 per level) that I mentioned is not a great idea, as a friend pointed out to me. Undead get d12 HD, which works out fine -- a good turning deals about half damage to an undead with equal HD -- but undead often have more HD than their CR. Consider a few cases:
A 1st level cleric turns a ghoul (CR 1). He deals 3 to 4 damage on average, and the Ghoul's +2 turn resistance reduces that to 1 to 2. 2 damage against a creature with 13 HP? Use the damn mace instead.
The same cleric, now level 3, meets a ghast. He turns it, dealing 3d6, an average of 10.5 damage. Subtract turn resistance 2, and the damage is 8.5. Against something with 29 HP, that's pretty pathetic.
It gets worse as you level up, because the undead progress to more and more HD (and higher resistance), but you still get only that 1d6 per level. I mean, look at the Mohrg. 12 HD, CR 8. You can come up with maybe 28 damage against its 91 HP, and it's not really going to even stall the thing.

Turning damage is really not a great choice -- undead are HP-heavy monsters, so attacking their HP is not the best option.

Re: Clerics are weak, they need the help!

Clerics aren't weak, but I won't go into a lengthy analysis here other than to say -- you aren't there for damage dealing; your spells are all about making your team stronger, making your enemies weaker or impeded, and controlling where they go on the battlefield. If you prepare Flamestrike, you're wasting your time.

By the way, can I mention here -- 3/4 BAB is not useless in combat. 3/4 is normal BAB. A few classes get a slightly better progression, but that does not reflect everyone who doesn't get full BAB having a lack of skill, nor does it imply that everyone with 3/4 BAB should be staying away from making attack rolls.

Anyway. Options for what to do with Turning to fix it -- I'll put those in another thread (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?p=9630296#post9630296) .
Tony Vargas
07-18-06, 07:29 PM All three options seem reasonable, so it's down to what fits your character concept, what meshes well with the group, and what the DM will allow.

1) has the advantage of being straightforward, if the feats are available, you can do it, no DM aproval required. Depending on the feat, you can also invest less in CHA than a turn-focused cleric. Thus, you're not really ignoring the class feature, just focused on using it one way, rather than another.

2) Is a good option if you're in a damage-heavy party, since damage adds up. If you're in a party with blasting mages and deadly warriors, then 'turning' undead and doing some damage puts them that much closer to being destroyed by the ensuing fireballs and mayhem the rest of the party unleashes. Conversely, if your group is more focused on save-or-else spells, unusuall attacks, and tactical feats, with damage not emphasized, or damage potential focused more on one character, then it won't synergize as well.

3) seems fairly minor, but more broadly aplicable than turn. It's still CHA-based, so it minimally disrupts the stat balance of the class. Obviously, it's only apropriate for a more warrior-focused cleric.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Keenath 07-15-06, 11:10 PM	I'm considering a cleric for a new game coming up. Now, I have two ideas for my cleric -- either a human cleric of Farlangn who travels and doesn't wear heavy armor (possibly using the Cloistered Cleric variant!), or a dwarven cleric. Problem is, I loathe turning. Making undead flee is often counterproductive, and the ones that turn to dust are the ones that you could've whipped anyway with ordinary weapons. And Turning always takes too long to work out at the table anyway; I'd prefer something simpler. So, I'm looking at what my options are. Option 1: Divine feats Probably the simplest option, mechanically -- if I don't like turning, I just don't turn. Take a divine feat or two and use them instead. I rather like Divine Vigor... As a dwarf in heavy armor, I don't get slowed down, so the +10 base speed brings me up to normal movement. I also think we don't get to use temp HP often enough; it's a neat mechanic. Downside, it costs a feat, and I still COULD turn if I wanted -- I'm ignoring a class feature. Option 2: Turning Damage This is the option in Complete Divine. This bypasses all the Turning Check rigamarole and makes it into a pretty simple operation: Declare you're turning, and deal 1d6 damage per cleric level to all undead in the area. If they have turn resistance, you subtract it just like DR or energy resistance. Easy. Option 3: Champion Cleric This is the option in the DMG/SRD section on Variant Character Classes. It suggests replacing Turning with the Smite Evil and Aura of Courage from the paladin. Does this seem like overkill to anyone else? I'm not worried about stepping on the Paladin's toes, but this seems like a big benefit for giving up just Turning. Do you suppose they meant Smite Evil 1/day only (as opposed to the Paladin's progression)? Would it be more appropriate to get the progession of Smites but not the aura? Or is the book's suggestion just fine as written? Which option do you think would be best?
Crinos 07-15-06, 11:25 PM	You know, I like the sound of that turn damage thing. I might use that in a campaign if I ever start one.
Seerow 07-15-06, 11:30 PM	I'm considering a cleric for a new game coming up. Now, I have two ideas for my cleric -- either a human cleric of Farlangn who travels and doesn't wear heavy armor (possibly using the Cloistered Cleric variant!), or a dwarven cleric. Problem is, I loathe turning. Making undead flee is often counterproductive, and the ones that turn to dust are the ones that you could've whipped anyway with ordinary weapons. And Turning always takes too long to work out at the table anyway; I'd prefer something simpler. So, I'm looking at what my options are. Option 1: Divine feats Probably the simplest option, mechanically -- if I don't like turning, I just don't turn. Take a divine feat or two and use them instead. I rather like Divine Vigor... As a dwarf in heavy armor, I don't get slowed down, so the +10 base speed brings me up to normal movement. I also think we don't get to use temp HP often enough; it's a neat mechanic. Downside, it costs a feat, and I still COULD turn if I wanted -- I'm ignoring a class feature. Option 2: Turning Damage This is the option in Complete Divine. This bypasses all the Turning Check rigamarole and makes it into a pretty simple operation: Declare you're turning, and deal 1d6 damage per cleric level to all undead in the area. If they have turn resistance, you subtract it just like DR or energy resistance. Easy. Option 3: Champion Cleric This is the option in the DMG/SRD section on Variant Character Classes. It suggests replacing Turning with the Smite Evil and Aura of Courage from the paladin. Does this seem like overkill to anyone else? I'm not worried about stepping on the Paladin's toes, but this seems like a big benefit for giving up just Turning. Do you suppose they meant Smite Evil 1/day only (as opposed to the Paladin's progression)? Would it be more appropriate to get the progession of Smites but not the aura? Or is the book's suggestion just fine as written? Which option do you think would be best? The books suggestion is fine. Compare that smite evil and aura to persisted Divine Power and Righteous Might through divine Metamagic.
ZinFeir 07-16-06, 04:58 AM	In Races of the Stone, Dwarf Cleric race sub you loose Turn undead and gain Smite Giant.
IbanezNinja 07-16-06, 10:06 AM	Just go with divine metamagic. You'll love those turn attempts when they are powering a persistant divine power or any other of your awesome buffs.
Keenath 07-16-06, 10:17 AM	Okay, yeah, I should've said this to start: Divine Metamagic is cheese, and Divine Persistent is made by Kraft, because it's the cheesiest. I will not be doing that. The books suggestion is fine. Compare that smite evil and aura to persisted Divine Power and Righteous Might through divine Metamagic.And that's why this comment doesn't hold any water for me. Compare a suggestion to an obviously broken combo? That doesn't tell me anything.
Dead_Karma 07-16-06, 02:17 PM	i'm simply going to say that if you don't like the turning rules, i'd go for turning damage instead alot easier to figure. of course there is also the favored soul class they don't turn, but get to know their spells and cast them like a sorc also, course you have to be picky because if i remember right that means they have to know inflict, cure, or both types of spells depending on your preferance.
Beckett 07-18-06, 01:40 AM	Turnning Undead is completely counterproductive to the game, and needs to be completely redone. Ravenloft has a nice rule for Turnning in that it does not matter if your HD are twice the Undeads. If you turn an undead, and it can not flee, (suchas being backed intoa corner), it is destroyed. The catch is that is the only time they are destroyed. A 20th level cleric still makes 2HD Zombies run in terror, not turning them to dust on the spot. Alternanatevly, you might get rid of turning and simply give the Cleric a new Domain every 5th Cleric level, like a Wizards Bonus Feats.
Rerecros 07-18-06, 01:48 AM	Oh thats just great, you're going to make clerics even more over-powered. If you're going to loose turning, your going to have to replace it with an equally useless ability.
Beckett 07-18-06, 01:55 AM	From years of playing them in many different ways, Clerics are the least "powerful" class. They get almost no useful skills, moderate spells, and they are most definetly not the best in combat. And hey, they aren't they only armored spellcasters out there anymore. Oh wait, that was since the DMG and Complete Warrior came out. Additional Domains simply grants them a better selection of prayers to serve the will of their deity with and to help protect save others daily, while the option for the modified Turning is much more risky, though it doesn't seem that way.
Keenath 07-18-06, 07:11 PM	Re: "Turning is useless, so a replacement ability should be useless." As I said to start the thread, turning IS often counterproductive, or allows you to quickly destroy enemies you could already quickly destroy. However, Divine feats, and Divine Metamagic in particular, make turning useful even if you never meet undead. Thus, a replacement ability should be given with the understanding that it's replacing both a useless ability and the opportunity to use any Divine feats. Smite seems to be a good fit, actually, now that I've looked at it for a while. It's probably usable fewer times per day than turning would've been, and each use is only good against a single target. In addition, adding your level to damage is really not a very crushing power; what's 10 hp to a CR 10 creature? Practically nothing. And a minor bonus to hit on a single attack is nice, but not really a bit deal. Smite is a relatively minor boost a few times per day; not really breaking the cleric. Now, second, the turning damage option (1d6 per level) that I mentioned is not a great idea, as a friend pointed out to me. Undead get d12 HD, which works out fine -- a good turning deals about half damage to an undead with equal HD -- but undead often have more HD than their CR. Consider a few cases: A 1st level cleric turns a ghoul (CR 1). He deals 3 to 4 damage on average, and the Ghoul's +2 turn resistance reduces that to 1 to 2. 2 damage against a creature with 13 HP? Use the damn mace instead. The same cleric, now level 3, meets a ghast. He turns it, dealing 3d6, an average of 10.5 damage. Subtract turn resistance 2, and the damage is 8.5. Against something with 29 HP, that's pretty pathetic. It gets worse as you level up, because the undead progress to more and more HD (and higher resistance), but you still get only that 1d6 per level. I mean, look at the Mohrg. 12 HD, CR 8. You can come up with maybe 28 damage against its 91 HP, and it's not really going to even stall the thing. Turning damage is really not a great choice -- undead are HP-heavy monsters, so attacking their HP is not the best option. Re: Clerics are weak, they need the help! Clerics aren't weak, but I won't go into a lengthy analysis here other than to say -- you aren't there for damage dealing; your spells are all about making your team stronger, making your enemies weaker or impeded, and controlling where they go on the battlefield. If you prepare Flamestrike, you're wasting your time. By the way, can I mention here -- 3/4 BAB is not useless in combat. 3/4 is normal BAB. A few classes get a slightly better progression, but that does not reflect everyone who doesn't get full BAB having a lack of skill, nor does it imply that everyone with 3/4 BAB should be staying away from making attack rolls. Anyway. Options for what to do with Turning to fix it -- I'll put those in another thread (http://boards1.wizards.com/showthread.php?p=9630296#post9630296) .
Tony Vargas 07-18-06, 07:29 PM	All three options seem reasonable, so it's down to what fits your character concept, what meshes well with the group, and what the DM will allow. 1) has the advantage of being straightforward, if the feats are available, you can do it, no DM aproval required. Depending on the feat, you can also invest less in CHA than a turn-focused cleric. Thus, you're not really ignoring the class feature, just focused on using it one way, rather than another. 2) Is a good option if you're in a damage-heavy party, since damage adds up. If you're in a party with blasting mages and deadly warriors, then 'turning' undead and doing some damage puts them that much closer to being destroyed by the ensuing fireballs and mayhem the rest of the party unleashes. Conversely, if your group is more focused on save-or-else spells, unusuall attacks, and tactical feats, with damage not emphasized, or damage potential focused more on one character, then it won't synergize as well. 3) seems fairly minor, but more broadly aplicable than turn. It's still CHA-based, so it minimally disrupts the stat balance of the class. Obviously, it's only apropriate for a more warrior-focused cleric.