Post/Author/DateTime	Post
deathbane 12-22-07, 04:17 PM	I did not check, but I beleive a cleric has to have the same alignment(exactly) as the monster he summons, unless he is neutral good or neutral evil, which gives him leeway on the lawful-neutral axis. A TN cleric could probably get away with a lot more, now that I think about it. If I choose a deity instead of an idea as my worship focus I am limited to certain domains, and my god could get mad at me and deny me spells for whatever reason. I do understand this is a roleplaying game, and power alone should not drive decisions, but unless I am missing something I don't see any benefit in claiming an alignment other than neutral-something, and not picking a deity at all. Thoughts anyone? After the edit: I do understand this will not likely break the game, but it just seems unfair that by not committing to an alignment or faith the player is rewarded. I know all players don't go neutral-something just to have leeway with their decisions, but for some reason it bothers me that by doing so allows them to get more with a class where alignment really matters.
The_Shaman 12-22-07, 09:12 PM	Hmm, I'd normally agree with you, but remember: the monsters you get are the king that serve your deity, which allows a little leeway imo. What they think of you personally is immaterial: they obey the summons because they respect the name by which you call them.
Salla 12-22-07, 09:16 PM	If you summon a creature, the Summon spell gains alignment descriptors according to that creature's alignment. The PHB states that "A cleric can’t cast spells of an alignment opposed to his own or his deity’s (if he has one). Spells associated with particular alignments are indicated by the chaos, evil, good, and law descriptors in their spell descriptions." So, a cleric with a Lawful alignment component OR deity can't summon Chaotic creatures, a cleric with a Chaotic alignment or deity can't summon Lawful creatures, and so forth.
Jorith 12-22-07, 10:16 PM	I did not check, but I beleive a cleric has to have the same alignment(exactly) as the monster he summons, unless he is neutral good or neutral evil, which gives him leeway on the lawful-neutral axis. A TN cleric could probably get away with a lot more, now that I think about it. If I choose a deity instead of an idea as my worship focus I am limited to certain domains, and my god could get mad at me and deny me spells for whatever reason. I do understand this is a roleplaying game, and power alone should not drive decisions, but unless I am missing something I don't see any benefit in claiming an alignment other than neutral-something, and not picking a deity at all. Thoughts anyone? After the edit: I do understand this will not likely break the game, but it just seems unfair that by not committing to an alignment or faith the player is rewarded. I know all players don't go neutral-something just to have leeway with their decisions, but for some reason it bothers me that by doing so allows them to get more with a class where alignment really matters. well at least roleplaying wise where would a cleric gets its power from if it doesn't commit to a alignment or faith
deathbane 12-22-07, 11:49 PM	well at least roleplaying wise where would a cleric gets its power from if it doesn't commit to a alignment or faith What I was saying was that by going neutral with any alignment it allows the cleric to play both sides of the field, by not committing to either one, such as evil vs good or law vs chaos
Seeker95 12-23-07, 08:47 AM	What I was saying was that by going neutral with any alignment it allows the cleric to play both sides of the field, by not committing to either one, such as evil vs good or law vs chaosThis is true, with the added stipulation that Salla noted. The deity will not grant / fulfill spells with an alignment tag opposite its own, either. The best of all worlds is to be a Neutral cleric of a Neutral deity, if versatility is the objective.