|
9 months ago ::
Oct 07, 2012 - 4:25PM
#1
|
|
|
Do we really need Radiant AND Holy damage? Personally, I'd prefer Holy. Sounds cooler.
DMAIA: DMs Against Immediate Actions - Turning 6 seconds into 15 minutes since 2008.
Vampire Class/Specialty in 2013!
Wizard: I cast Burning Hands.
Rogue: I grab a torch and a can of hairspray.
I prefer Next because 4E players and CharOpers can't find their ass without a grid and a power called "Find Ass."
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Oct 07, 2012 - 4:57PM
#2
|
Date Joined:
May 26, 2007
|
I'd prefer Divine. That way it's separated from goodness or evilness, and just has a divine source. Which I imagine both Radiant and Holy do.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Oct 07, 2012 - 5:12PM
#3
|
|
|
In 4E we had Radiant and Necrotic compared to earlier editions Holy/Unholy. I think they do need a split as opposed to Divine. I guess I like Holy because it sounds cooler and Necrotic because it sounds more descriptive.
DMAIA: DMs Against Immediate Actions - Turning 6 seconds into 15 minutes since 2008.
Vampire Class/Specialty in 2013!
Wizard: I cast Burning Hands.
Rogue: I grab a torch and a can of hairspray.
I prefer Next because 4E players and CharOpers can't find their ass without a grid and a power called "Find Ass."
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Oct 08, 2012 - 8:49AM
#4
|
Date Joined:
Jul 28, 2011
|
Hey all, Since this isn't a session report I'll be moving it to Playtest Packet Discussion. Thanks! Monica
Monica
Wizards of the Coast Online Community Coordinator
A friendly dragon.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Oct 08, 2012 - 9:37AM
#5
|
Date Joined:
Sep 19, 2006
|
I think holy/unholy destinction carries with it the element of alignment. Holy = Good, Unholy = Evil. I'm not so sure that's a good thing, espically when it's expected that evil clerics might be in the game as PCs too. With a less alignment-weighted term (Radiant), it can easily apply to clerics (and other Divine classes) that serve evil deities and there isn't a problem. Additionally, it's often associated that Unholy damage would "heal" the undead but as an evil cleric, you still might want to destory the unliving and that then means all attacks that are "unholy" are rendered useless.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Oct 20, 2012 - 11:08AM
#6
|
Date Joined:
Sep 20, 2008
|
I also think that radiant connected up to healing positive energy, energy that was constructive, while necrotic was like entropy, chaotic, and decomposing, the anti-creation, so thematically I felt it fit, while meta-game wise fewer energy types is always better because they more often come into play.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Oct 20, 2012 - 11:23PM
#7
|
Date Joined:
Dec 17, 2006
|
Positive Energy = Healing = Radiant Damage
Negative Energy = Unlife = Necrotic Damage
Holy = Good gods
Unholy = Evil gods
This fits almost perfectly with the playtest materials--so much so that I'm willing to bet the one part where it doesn't fit (Channel Divinity dealing holy/unholy damage) is an oversight.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Oct 21, 2012 - 11:50AM
#8
|
Date Joined:
Dec 21, 2011
|
Hey, did they leave out vulnerability to radiant/holy damage for undead in the newest make over of the monsters? I can't see it anywhere. Quite frankly, it is a good idea. When creatures were vulnerable to radiant damage, the cleric's radiant lance "at will" was way too powerful.
|
|
|
