Turning Undead limits...

[Captain_K]

I understand that if you fail to turn say 50 skeletons coming at you in one group you cannot attempt to turn that group of 50 again until the next day. If successful the Cleric (or Paladin) could turn d12 of the 50 skeletons.. now here's the question there are still at least 38 more skeletons coming on... the turner has not failed.. could the Cleric, who as NOT failed, turn a second time, the next round on the same group? Would it be automatic? At a bonus for the second try since the first try was successful or would it be at a cumulative penalty?

Skeleton is the least of the issues, say three vampires come on.. the group of three.. if it is truly a group per the description even the most powerful cleric can only turn one... the other two cannot be turned for 24 hours?

I like the idea of "IF successful, additional turning attempts can be performed on those you did not get so long as you continue to successfully turn that single group of undead. Further successive successful attempts are made at an accumulative +2 bonus."

Go back to the first example, make it 12 skeleton and the successfully turned group size is, darn a one... one skeleton, 11 to go.... wow... that sucked, "Hey mister CK, can I try again next round?" So to that I say, sure and you get a +2 to that attempt, next round.

Thoughts?

[Snoring Rock]

Not sure you get another whack at the skeletons. But let me throw this in there. The animate dead spell only allows the caster to create up to his own number of HD in single casting and a maximum of 2xHD for a total number of controlled undead. So a 25th level caster placed the skeletons there. Or 25 beginners did. So a caster can only control so many undead. 50 skeletons is a lot. The M&T suggests 1-10 in a single encounter. You can do more, but it starts to step outside the spell possibilities of the rules as written.

From the PHB: "the caster can’t create more HD of undead than the caster has levels in any single casting of the spell. The undead remain under the caster’s control indefinitely. No matter how many times the caster uses this spell, however, the character can only control 2 HD worth of undead creatures per caster level. If the caster exceeds this number, all the newly created creatures fall under the caster’s control, and any excess undead from previous castings become uncontrolled." I assume they wander off.

3 vampires get turned one at a time as extraordinary undead. So you would get one roll for each, taking one round a piece. They cannot all be turned the same round. But yes, you get a total of 3 shots at them.

Back to the skeletons, as a CK, I would not allow more to be turned that day. You get so many and then the group must step in and hack them down. At 50 skeletons, if your party is high enough level to do it, then the cleric should easily make the roll to turn/destroy 1-12 of them, plus his/her modifier, and then the party should hack them down. If not, then RUN. The dude who created the collection of undead, may still be lurking and he is going to kick your...

But, if in YOUR game you have 50-skeleton encounters, then I would allow the subsequent attempts to turn up until the cleric failed.

I am more of a RAW kind of guy.

[Rigon]

I agree with SR. I wouldn't allow addition Turns, but if you want to, then I don't see how it would break the game any. Just realize that it will make undead a lot less effective of a challenge.

In my Monday night game, three of the players are playing either full clerics, or multiclassed clerics. In the first adventure there were several encounters with skeletons, zombies, and even a wight or two, but because of the multiple chances for Turns, the undead were fairly weak advisories (technically not a bad thing for first level PCs, but kind of anticlimactic for the adventure).

R-

[Arduin]

Up 'till now I thought one COULD keep turning as long you don't fail. But I read further:

"Essentially, a cleric has one chance to turn each
opponent in a combat or 24 hour period, with each opponent
being composed of a group of undead of the same type."

Hey, it doesn't say Paladin in that part of the rule.

[Treebore]

I allow them to turn until they fail their roll. Been doing it that way since 1E, so I don't do it differently in C&C.

[Arduin]

I allow them to turn until they fail their roll. Been doing it that way since 1E, so I don't do it differently in C&C.

Same here

[serleran]

If there are 50 undead and one cleric, the cleric should know to retreat.

The exception being when they are powerful enough to auto-destroy / turn.

Naturally, if they did not fail, they have not failed. They have not even tried against "each opponent" because they affected only a certain number. So... they get to try again, and then stop when they are unable to successfully make the check.

[Arduin]

Naturally, if they did not fail, they have not failed. They have not even tried against "each opponent" because they affected only a certain number. So... they get to try again, and then stop when they are unable to successfully make the check.

Duh, brain fart on my part

[Daniel]

If there are 50 undead and one cleric, the cleric should know to retreat.

Unless the GM has made it a situation where they can't retreat.

But of course no GM would do that, would they?

[Captain_K]

If you're trying to be the next Necromancer of the year... you don't mind if you loose control of skeletons... so you can keep creating them and lock them away safely for future use... think mote filled with skeletons.... so high numbers is possible.

The PH has two sentences.. "a cleric has one chance to turn each opponent in a combat.." supports the ideas above that you can try many times so that you get a try at each. But then the next sentence says "with each opponent being composed of a group of undead of the same type." So three Vampires together is one group, you get one shot at them and you can only turn one unless you get a good CHA modifier, two, three or at most four.. so a pack of 5+ vampires and you have to deal with some even if you turn them with an 18 CHA.

So, after hearing all this, I'm inclined to go with the plan, "you get a crack at them all" so if the number is over the number you can turn then they are in affect "another group" and can try again a second time or third etc as needed so long as you keep making the turning... eventually a 1 will cause a failure.

[Treebore]

Well, technically, your "group" is how ever many you are even able to affect, which at best is 1D12+ WIS modifier.

[Tadhg]

If there are 50 undead and one cleric, the cleric should know to retreat.

The exception being when they are powerful enough to auto-destroy / turn.

Naturally, if they did not fail, they have not failed. They have not even tried against "each opponent" because they affected only a certain number. So... they get to try again, and then stop when they are unable to successfully make the check.

What?

Contradictory methinks.

Clerics should never retreat, evar!!

Anywho, I agree with not fail - then can try again for the next group!!

[Snoring Rock]

If you're trying to be the next Necromancer of the year... you don't mind if you loose control of skeletons... so you can keep creating them and lock them away safely for future use... think mote filled with skeletons.... so high numbers is possible.

The PH has two sentences.. "a cleric has one chance to turn each opponent in a combat.." supports the ideas above that you can try many times so that you get a try at each. But then the next sentence says "with each opponent being composed of a group of undead of the same type." So three Vampires together is one group, you get one shot at them and you can only turn one unless you get a good CHA modifier, two, three or at most four.. so a pack of 5+ vampires and you have to deal with some even if you turn them with an 18 CHA.

So, after hearing all this, I'm inclined to go with the plan, "you get a crack at them all" so if the number is over the number you can turn then they are in affect "another group" and can try again a second time or third etc as needed so long as you keep making the turning... eventually a 1 will cause a failure.

I see your point, but the caster loses control after he goes over his limit. So how does the skeleton that was lost, know to attack and when? It can be played anyway you like, but how do you define "controlled" undead?

[Captain_K]

Per the PH, "Skeletons are mindless, but are aware of living things and always attack them." So a clever, evil cleric or necromancer makes a mote all around his abode. The walls of the mote are not able to be climbed by skeletons. That's not an impossible feat for engineer, dwarven stone mason, or earth/stone shaping magic wielder. Start filling that mote with skeletons, equipped to kill. They do not sleep, eat, complain, make noise, anything.. they will stand around until something comes within range to kill. Being Neutral, nearly mindless, they will kill any living thing that they can reach... one assumes they do not kill each other. Thus a mote of skeletons needs NO control to do its job. Surely I'm not the only one to have figured this out and set such things against PCs prior to this... evil genius I ain't!

By the way, a cleric can fill that mote fast, min is five per day, but once 6th level is reached that rate can raise to 12 per day and by just 8th level its 24 per day! The only limit is getting the bodies with bones in them.. that to me would be the task of an Alcott (we'll call him Jack) or henchman with all the skeletons under command to "Bring back the bodies "Alcott Jack" points at to this place." They would not care if the bodies were alive or dead and Alcott Jack can decide who to point at.. any old villager, dog, dead body, heck even a horse, would work.. skeleton or flesh, live or dead.. just needs to have bones.

Its like the Joker in one of the recent batman movies... "the toys this guy loves the most are cheap and plentiful"!

[Treebore]

I don't know about the rest of you guys, but I am kind of shocked that we have yet to have any jokes about "tuning" the undead, as it is spelled in the title of this thread.

[Captain_K]

It is a well known fact the 'evil geniuses cannot spell.

[Captain_K]

Darn, when you edit the original post, it does not fix them all.. see, I told you I was no evil genius!

[Lurker]

It is a well known fact the 'evil geniuses cannot spell.

Well, I CANNOT spell, so does that mean I'm an evil geniuss ????

...

In my Monday night game, three of the players are playing either full clerics, or multiclassed clerics. In the first adventure there were several encounters with skeletons, zombies, and even a wight or two, but because of the multiple chances for Turns, the undead were fairly weak advisories (technically not a bad thing for first level PCs, but kind of anticlimactic for the adventure).

R-

As one of the players in that group (and the one hoping around on the table keeping the undead busy while the various clerics tried to turn them) I'm happy that eventually one of the 3 clerics finally got them to run away, so we could easily kill them later! If I remember correctly, the first cleric failed or only turned 1 or 2, the next cleric turned 3. It wasn't until the last cleric got his turn and luckily maxed out his roll. A little bit of bad luck, or less good luck, and things would have gone badly for us.

If there are 50 undead and one cleric, the cleric should know to retreat.

...

I would say that even if you allow them to be turned as smaller groups and give the character a chance to keep turning until they make a failed roll, with 50 of them coming at you retreating or falling back to a more defensible position is a very good COA!!!!! The same is true, but more so for the 3-5+ vamps. At times you need to just run away!

Cap_K, I like your mote idea. I've kicked the idea around a bit before, but never that large a scale. I really like the idea of dog and horse skeletons too for some reason ...

[Captain_K]

OK, for those in favor of "allowing turning attempts until you fail" is it
a) Each roll is at the same difficulty
b) Each roll gets harder by -2 to ensure faster failure
c) Each roll gets easier with a +2 bonus because "you just did it successfully so you get a bonus"

Wish I knew how to do that voting thingy... if one of you want to set that up or walk me through it this might be a good voting option.. I suppose d) is only one roll.

[Treebore]

Just a normal roll until they actually fail. Think about, if they succeed at turning, have they failed? No. So they keep getting to roll until they have failed the roll. Like I said above, this is how it was done in 1E, and its how I have done it ever since. Even during the 5 years I did 3E.

[serleran]

OK, for those in favor of "allowing turning attempts until you fail" is it
a) Each roll is at the same difficulty
b) Each roll gets harder by -2 to ensure faster failure
c) Each roll gets easier with a +2 bonus because "you just did it successfully so you get a bonus"

Wish I knew how to do that voting thingy... if one of you want to set that up or walk me through it this might be a good voting option.. I suppose d) is only one roll.

By the rules, all turning attempts are made at normal difficulty, save for exceptions either in the monster description or because the Castle Keeper has elected to modify an encounter. So.... the RAW answer is A.

I typically have certain locations make turning easier, more difficult, or in some cases... automatic/impossible. For example, undead simply cannot enter the inner sanctum to Laril, Lady of Gilded Hips (Goddess of Life), and so any attempt to turn them in adjacent rooms would receive a bonus, and may be automatic destruction for the weaker types. On the contrary, the hellholes of Gorim Death-Face might make turning impossible as the undead are infused with supernormal nastiness.

Just depends. I like mixing it up.