Why all the hate for Turn Undead?

triqui

Adventurer
(Of course, that raises the whole can of worms of 'evil gods' in the first place. While not wholly unknown in real-life myth, they are much less common than in D&D. When you do get something like a 'god of murder', most often you find it's a cult worshipping an aspect of a more palatable deity.)

Lots of the "sacrifce human for me" gods of the Aztechs and Mayans would be evil under D&D moral compass. Sacrificing unwilling people for power is evil, as far as D&D alignment goes.

Furthermore, you don't find a lot of "evil gods" in real life, because real life does not have inherently evil cultures and races. D&D, however, does, and the pantheon of cultures like the Orcs, the Gnolls, or the Drow isn't going to be pleasent.
 

log in or register to remove this ad

Shadeydm

First Post
AFAIK, 2e did for paladins (and I house ruled it for clerics too). I think Dark Sun priests (who are elemental-based) were able to turn elementals of the opposite element, and rebuke his own element too.

Imho, it makes much more sense than turning undeads, even for good-aligned "judeo-christian like" general clerics with no deity specialty that populated the original D&D. Exorcism of demons make more sense than turning undeads, tradition wise, and demons seem to be a broader "this guys irk me a lot" in D&D than zombies and skeletons. Demons want to destroy the world, both the seas of Poseidon and the woods of Elhonna. Vampires are traditionally turned away, but not only by faith, sometimes they are turned by crosses, garlic, sun, fire, mirrors... they are a bunch of scary people. It's something related to the *creature*, not the priest. Now they even sparkle, so they are even pussier :p. However, other undeads aren't scared or turned away in traditional stories -zombies , for example-. Turn undead isn't a common trope out of european judeo-christian tradition, either. It's not common to see "Van Helsing-like" stuff in mythology about undeads in Japan, or China, or India, or the Aztechs.

I don't see faith = judeo-christian but since it seems like there is something personal at play here I think I will just bow out and say to each his own and have fun...
 

Lots of the "sacrifce human for me" gods of the Aztechs and Mayans would be evil under D&D moral compass. Sacrificing unwilling people for power is evil, as far as D&D alignment goes.

No argument here. Though in fairness to them, they thought the sun literally wouldn't rise if they didn't sacrifice. (If some of them didn't really believe that, yet sacrificed anyway - well, that's just plain evil by any moral compass I have any respect for.)

Furthermore, you don't find a lot of "evil gods" in real life, because real life does not have inherently evil cultures and races. D&D, however, does, and the pantheon of cultures like the Orcs, the Gnolls, or the Drow isn't going to be pleasent.

Also a good point. Though there's a chicken-and-egg problem here... is Gruumsh evil because orcs are evil? Or are orcs evil because they were created by Gruumsh? The latter choice seems better supported by the usual fluff. (Though if you go the Tolkien route, perhaps Gruumsh 'created' orcs by corrupting them from some other, relatively nice, raw material.)

Gnolls are a bit different, because they worship a demon lord. I doubt Yeenoghu 'created' gnolls in any capacity, so it would be interesting to know what gnolls were like beforehand?
 

triqui

Adventurer
I don't see faith = judeo-christian but since it seems like there is something personal at play here I think I will just bow out and say to each his own and have fun...

I haven't said "faith=judeo-christian". I have said "faith turning undeads=judeo-christian", which is completelly different. Of course Roma's Vestals had faith in Jupiter, and norse's gothis had faith in Thor, and aztechs priests had faith in Huitzilopochtli. Just like modern tibetan lamas have faith in Buddha and modern voodoo houngans have faith in Loas. Faith isn't restricted to judeo-christian clergy or religion. What those other religions and cultures *don't* have, however, is a tradition of stories where such faith turn vampires or ghosts away, like judeo-christian tradition has. That faith holds vampires at bay *is* a judeo-christian tradition. Aztech tiahuelpuchis are hold at bay by onions and metal, not by faith.
 

triqui

Adventurer
Also a good point. Though there's a chicken-and-egg problem here... is Gruumsh evil because orcs are evil? Or are orcs evil because they were created by Gruumsh? The latter choice seems better supported by the usual fluff. (Though if you go the Tolkien route, perhaps Gruumsh 'created' orcs by corrupting them from some other, relatively nice, raw material.)

This depends on how orcs are built in your campaign. In some, Gruumsh has created them, in some others, he did not.

For example, in most fictions I can think of, Drows *weren't* created by Lloth. They were created by Corellon, and then split from the "good elves" for some reason (which vary from world to world). They worship Lloth because they are evil, not because they were created like that.

However, Evil Gods creating Evil Races also work as a rationalizing about why such evil races exist. I mean: in real world, no culture or race is intrinsically evil to it's roots. Sure, they might have had "not-so-bright" parts of history here and there (such as Germany's nazism, Spainish Inquisition, or the Slavery in the south of US), but the people is not "evil" in the sense that gnolls are. They are just misguided, confused, or have a moral compass that looks bad now, but didn't in their era (Inquisitors would had described themselves as "lawful good" for "fighting witchcraft").

That said, even with the difference between real world and D&D pantheons... "turn undead" is not a classic trope in every culture of Earth. In some of them, particularly those of judeo-christian-islamic heritage, yes, it does, because God is only one, and he is good, and fights The Devil which is bad, so is all witchcraft and wizardry. In other traditions, it doesn't work that way. Chinese Vampires are hold with mirrors, or using what would be described as "wizardry" by western observers (I Ching rituals and what not). In Voodoo religion, Zombies are not only not held at bay by houngans, but actually *created* by them. In Rome, one wouldn't pray to Poseidon for protection against undeads, for the same reasons one wouldn't pray to Hades for protection against sea monsters.

And so on. Turn Undead isn't a mechanic that all the religions should share, imho, because not all religions do so in real life myth. It's something the game carries on, since the times where "clerics" where modeled after christian templars. Just like they had proficiency with heavy armors and shields and maces. It made sense, somewhat, in that era, but when 2e introduced the specialty priests, those where built under specific rules, depending on the god. They had something diferent, instead of turn undead (like Incite Berserker Rage, Charm, or Inspire Fear were the examples provided for War, Beauty and Death gods), and the weapons and armor proficiencies depended on the god too. When 3e came, this broke apart, and all specialty priests where given Turn Undead and full armor proficiencies, so the clergymen of Nature and Wisdom walked the world turning Undeads and wearing full plate.
 

Monachus350

Villager
Turn Undead should be separated from Channel Divinity, as a mechanic. Using the same resource (Divinity to be channeled, up to 3 uses by level 18) for two different powers is absurd. It is poorly designed. The number of uses should have remained as per the 3.5e mechanic: 1+cha modifier, with a minimum of at least one use. Keep the 5e save mechanism for turn undead, and have the HD to be affected scale as a character goes up in level.
At level 2 (roll 4d4) for the number of undead HD to be affected. At L6 (roll 4d6), at L10 (roll 4d8), at L14 (roll 4d10), and at L18 (roll 4d12).
There, much more reasonable.
 



dave2008

Legend
Turn Undead should be separated from Channel Divinity, as a mechanic. Using the same resource (Divinity to be channeled, up to 3 uses by level 18) for two different powers is absurd. It is poorly designed. The number of uses should have remained as per the 3.5e mechanic: 1+cha modifier, with a minimum of at least one use. Keep the 5e save mechanism for turn undead, and have the HD to be affected scale as a character goes up in level.
At level 2 (roll 4d4) for the number of undead HD to be affected. At L6 (roll 4d6), at L10 (roll 4d8), at L14 (roll 4d10), and at L18 (roll 4d12).
There, much more reasonable.
Just to be clear, you are responding to a thread that is 11 years old (2012). So back in the 4e days, before Channel Divinity was a mechanic IIRC.
 


Remove ads

Top