Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Francius 05-19-06, 01:54 PM	Since the PHB states that a cleric can't cast spells of an alignment opposed to his and as an example simply gives that a chaotic good cleric can not cast spells with the evil descriptor,would I be correct to add that that same cleric can't also cast spells with the lawful descriptor since part of his alignment is chaotic? If the answer to the above question is yes,then everyone would consider playing a cleric of a neutral deity or one with a true neutral belief,in order to be able to cast all the spells indiscriminately. Wouldn't that reduce the variety of that class in roleplaying terms?I mean,every cleric would be neutral or following a neutral deity so he could get all the spells he wants...
Esponer 05-19-06, 02:01 PM	Yes, you are correct in regards to the lawful/chaotic issue. And it is generally assumed that, as D&D is a roleplaying game, people are not playing exclusively true neutral clerics because they are choosing their characters based upon what they want to roleplay, not maximising their spell selection.
mvincent 05-19-06, 02:08 PM	would I be correct to add that that same cleric can't also cast spells with the lawful descriptor since part of his alignment is chaotic?Yes Wouldn't that reduce the variety of that class in roleplaying terms?I mean,every cleric would be neutral or following a neutral deity so he could get all the spells he wants...A neutral cleric following a neutral deity is certainly more flexible, but he also wouldn't have access to any of the alignment domains, and the limited amount of neutral dieties means that the cleric may not get the other domains he might want either. But overall, giving up some aligned spells may not be a big sacrifice, especially for someone that genuinely wants to take on a certain role (which is a part of the game), and so wouldn't consider using those spells anyway.
Rulebook 05-19-06, 02:12 PM	yeah because nobody wants to follow a god like Heironus or Hextor, or any other interesting god. true neutral dieties are often rather boring folks. they dont get the good domains like war and such because they're not very neutral things.
Francius 05-19-06, 02:31 PM	True neutral dieties are often rather boring folks. . Couldn't agree more. Ever heard of Lathander by the way?
Zherog 05-19-06, 02:42 PM	Ever heard of Lathander by the way? Indeed. And he's NG as I recall.
ShinAkuma2 05-19-06, 03:57 PM	But I want to cast Magic Circle Against Law, Chaos, Evil AND Good! No fair!
ManTimeForgot 05-19-06, 07:18 PM	Being true neutral and you can cast all of the magic circles. Of course this comes with the price tag of being vulnerable to ALL of the force words (holy word, blasphemy, dictum, and word of chaos), even when you use them. So you are essentially guaranteed to deafen yourself, and if you have bonus caster levels you could conceivably kill yourself... MTF
ClementWillowbreaker 05-19-06, 07:26 PM	If you want to cast all the Magic Circles, be a Wizard. They can cast whatever they want (and often have to do so- so use Planar Binding [Good] they first have to cast Protection vs. Good [Evil]). They just have to watch out for all those evil/good acts changing their alignment over time.
Vaalingrade Ashland 05-19-06, 07:35 PM	yeah because nobody wants to follow a god like Heironus or Hextor, or any other interesting god. Harry and Hex are interesting? AHAHAHAHAHA! The only core god who's halfway interesting is Wee Jas