If I understand it correctly, an evil cleric is not entitled to Cure Wounds (positive channeling), only Inflict (negative channeling).
So, if an Evil cleric wants to use a Wand of Cure, does she have to use the Use Magic Device skill in order to:
a) Emulate a Class Feature (positive channeling), DC 20, or
b) Use a Wand (DC 20), or
c) both - first a), then b) ?
And what about a PC from another non-caster class (Rogue, Monk, Fighter, ecc.) attempting the same action?
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
An evil cleric is not entitled to spontaneous casting for cure spells, but can still otherwise prepare them normally. They are not removed from his spell list. As such, an evil cleric can use a wand of cure light wounds with no use magic device check needed.
Someone from a different class (let's say a Rogue) would need to make a DC 20 check to use the wand.
One thing you are confusing is Channeling. "Channel Positive Energy" or "Channel Negative Energy" is different from a cure/inflict spell, has a different effect, and cannot be put into a wand.
Your God of Knowledge,
Nethys
An evil cleric is not entitled to spontaneous casting for cure spells, but can still otherwise prepare them normally. They are not removed from his spell list.
I see...
My understanding was that, since evil clerics are not allowed to channel positive energy, they were automatically precluded from casting Cure spells of any sort, because the descrption for those spells explicitly states "the cleric channels positive energy".I even know of a fellow gamer whose cleric of Urgathoa avoids casting Cure spells of any type (not even from a wand or staff) because he's afraid that by doing so he would immediately incur the wrath of the Pallid Princess. :)
Someone from a different class (let's say a Rogue) would need to make a DC 20 check to use the wand.
OK, we agree on this one.
--
Nekomante
An evil cleric is not entitled to spontaneous casting for cure spells, but can still otherwise prepare them normally. They are not removed from his spell list.I see...
My understanding was that, since evil cleric are not allowed to channel positive energy, they were automatically precluded from casting Cure spells of any sort, since the descrption for those spells explicitly states "the cleric channels positive energy".I even know of a fellow gamer whose cleric of Urgathoa avoids casting Cure spells of any type (not even from a wand or staff) because he's afraid that by doing so he would immediately incur the wrath of the Pallid Princess. :)
Someone from a different class (let's say a Rogue) would need to make a DC 20 check to use the wand.OK, we agree on this one.
--
Nekomante
The cleric can cast cure spells, but they are choosing not to. If you follow a god of death and decay, healing may be frowned upon, but the character still knows how to prepare and cast cure spells.
|
|
An evil cleric is not entitled to spontaneous casting for cure spells, but can still otherwise prepare them normally. They are not removed from his spell list.I see...
My understanding was that, since evil clerics are not allowed to channel positive energy, they were automatically precluded from casting Cure spells of any sort, because the descrption for those spells explicitly states "the cleric channels positive energy".I even know of a fellow gamer whose cleric of Urgathoa avoids casting Cure spells of any type (not even from a wand or staff) because he's afraid that by doing so he would immediately incur the wrath of the Pallid Princess. :)
Someone from a different class (let's say a Rogue) would need to make a DC 20 check to use the wand.OK, we agree on this one.
--
Nekomante
Clerics are allowed to cast cure/inflict spells regardless of alignment as those spells do not have the [good] or [evil] descriptors. You will often see clerics of evil gods prepare cure spells in published adventures (or just in normal play) since they don't have as quick access to them as good/neutral clerics.
It's not as if the gods of those evil clerics want their chosen to die, after all. Cure spells are allowed just fine for the evil ones. Now [good] aligned spells, on the other hand, would not be.
Your God of Knowledge,
Nethys
Wands are spell trigger items To use a spell trigger item without use magic device you need to have the spell on your spell list. Most arcane casters do not have cure light wounds on their spell list, so cannot use wands of cure light wounds.
|
I'm told from several sources that a Arcane Wizard can do so without penalty.
This statement is not incorrect, technically. A Wizard does not have an inherent numerical penalty when attempting to activate such a wand, but unless you can find a method to add cure light wounds to your class spell list, you must rely on the Use Magic Device skill, as dragonhunterq explained.
Cure and inflict spells are not good or evil spells inherently. Spells that have alignment restrictions are marked in their descriptions.
Evil clerics have living allies who need healing. Sometimes they have to cast some cure spells (although the smart ones just use infernal healing).
If I understand it correctly, an evil cleric is not entitled to Cure Wounds (positive channeling), only Inflict (negative channeling).
So, if an Evil cleric wants to use a Wand of Cure, does she have to use the Use Magic Device skill in order to:
a) Emulate a Class Feature (positive channeling), DC 20, or
b) Use a Wand (DC 20), or
c) both - first a), then b) ?And what about a PC from another non-caster class (Rogue, Monk, Fighter, ecc.) attempting the same action?
The cure and inflict spells ARE NOT CHANNELLING even though they use postive or negative energy, they are simply spells.
Evil clerics can't cast cure light wounds spontaneously but they can certainly prepare them, and those spells are on their class list,, so they can use wands normally.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Why would evil ever deny its mortal servants the ability to heal themselves?
Because it is evil, duh.
Also when you use a wand you are not casting the spell. The wand is the caster. You are just activating a magic item.
Howdy just wanted to chip in to the discussion. As far as I understand cure spells are completely usable by clerics of evil gods. Now in the sense of rp and the Pallid princess(one of my fav gods)rather then being a straight god of death she cares more about undeath, but also a god of basically having fun doing what you want and never letting the good times stop hence the gluttony in her portfolio. So it is my understanding that she won't mind a cleric healing himself so that he may live to see another day and find new indulgences.
Howdy just wanted to chip in to the discussion. As far as I understand cure spells are completely usable by clerics of evil gods. Now in the sense of rp and the Pallid princess(one of my fav gods)rather then being a straight god of death she cares more about undeath, but also a god of basically having fun doing what you want and never letting the good times stop hence the gluttony in her portfolio. So it is my understanding that she won't mind a cleric healing himself so that he may live to see another day and find new indulgences.
It's a 6 year old undead thread. The actual question the necromancer is asking is his do you get a wizard to use a wand of CLW.
Also when you use a wand you are not casting the spell. The wand is the caster. You are just activating a magic item.
Yeah let me just use that wand of blood biography. Drinking blood from the corpses of my enemies to gain their power is only evil if I cast the spell, I'm just using a wand, sheesh.
Next up: is eating babies wrong as long as you have somebody else cook it for you?
|
|
Next up: is eating babies wrong as long as you have somebody else cook it for you?
That would be a perspective thing. Is the act of eating babies the evil thing, or is the killing/cooking them the evil action?
There's an interesting Essay on this topic, called "A Modest Proposal." Worth reading, though beware that the Author isn't serious, despite no hint of it in the text.
Also when you use a wand you are not casting the spell. The wand is the caster. You are just activating a magic item.Yeah let me just use that wand of blood biography. Drinking blood from the corpses of my enemies to gain their power is only evil if I cast the spell, I'm just using a wand, sheesh.
Next up: is eating babies wrong as long as you have somebody else cook it for you?
That is how the rules work. You are not the caster. As a GM you can disallow it, but the rules allow it. You might lose your powers after doing it, but you can do it.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I even know of a fellow gamer whose cleric of Urgathoa avoids casting Cure spells of any type (not even from a wand or staff) because he's afraid that by doing so he would immediately incur the wrath of the Pallid Princess. :)
Bah. Your understanding is shallow. There are so many... delightful... ways to use positive energy as a worshiper of evil.
You don't want your playthings to break too soon, now do you? And as a worshipper of Ugathoa, you don't want your... 'cattle'... to die too soon before you have quenched your thirst by... 'milking' it (with your dagger).
Next up: is eating babies wrong as long as you have somebody else cook it for you?That would be a perspective thing. Is the act of eating babies the evil thing, or is the killing/cooking them the evil action?
There's an interesting Essay on this topic, called "A Modest Proposal." Worth reading, though beware that the Author isn't serious, despite no hint of it in the text.
I have found myself arguing that, in a stranded island situation, the most moral course of action for a paladin would be to use lay on hands and restoration spells in order to use himself as a food source.
Paladins are pretty much the most suited class for this kind of act, since you could technically argue that bleeding is HP damage, so even a level 2 paladin could at least provide some protein for those around him.
|
|
I even know of a fellow gamer whose cleric of Urgathoa avoids casting Cure spells of any type (not even from a wand or staff) because he's afraid that by doing so he would immediately incur the wrath of the Pallid Princess. :)Bah. Your understanding is shallow. There are so many... delightful... ways to use positive energy as a worshiper of evil.
You don't want your playthings to break too soon, now do you? And as a worshipper of Ugathoa, you don't want your... 'cattle'... to die too soon before you have quenched your thirst by... 'milking' it (with your dagger).
Dunno, with Urgathoa, I've run into similar issues. She's very pro-undeath, so any action that increases the lifespan of party members seems rather iffy as her cleric. Even selective channel on her negative energy seems iffy. Urgathoa doesn't strike me as sadistic, even if she's evil, she's just loves her undeath.
Zon Kuthon, on the other hand, would totally support healing magic, as it means they can recieve more pain without dying.
|
|
I have found myself arguing that, in a stranded island situation, the most moral course of action for a paladin would be to use lay on hands and restoration spells in order to use himself as a food source.
Paladins are pretty much the most suited class for this kind of act, since you could technically argue that bleeding is HP damage, so even a level 2 paladin could at least provide some protein for those around him.
Depends on the deity, but paladins strike me as the type to start fasting and wait for deliverance from god, rather than seeking a solution, like you suggest.
Not sure on pathfinder worship, but the bible is very clear that drinking blood and eating the flesh of man is a no-no. I have heard from self-claimed christians, that this only applies in social settings, and this isn't expected when starving to death in a mountain cave or on a desolate island. Personally, seems like God's rules should be absolute, rather than contextual, but that's a difference of opinion.
Beyond that, I would argue that the casting of spells and use of class abilities would burn energy (calories). So I don't think I'd allow this to function indefinitely, but it seems a viable solution for the first few days (provided blood drinking/canibalism is OK by your deity and code). If it isn't ok, expect to lose your paladin powers BEFORE you get rescued.
Depends on the deity, but paladins strike me as the type to start fasting and wait for deliverance from god, rather than seeking a solution, like you suggest.I have found myself arguing that, in a stranded island situation, the most moral course of action for a paladin would be to use lay on hands and restoration spells in order to use himself as a food source.
Paladins are pretty much the most suited class for this kind of act, since you could technically argue that bleeding is HP damage, so even a level 2 paladin could at least provide some protein for those around him.
Ah, but remember- this is big strong paladin man.
As in he might be the most physically fit among the stranded survivors, and his physical abilities might be key to surviving.
At least if you just grab any random group of people and add the paladin in. Most people are like... level 2 commoners with a 14 at most in their best stat.
On the morality on even nonlethal cannibalism... it is iffy. Typically, it is a VERY harsh evil act... but then again, it is usually put in the context of urgathoa worshippers purposefully killing people just to eat them. It doesn't get into the realities of opportunistic cannibalism that is a harsh necessity that sometimes comes up at sea and in long travels.
On the 'for' side though, there is the lizardfolk bestiary entry. Lizardfolk are noted as being true neutral, generally... but the general lack of food in their swamp environment means that they sometimes have to eat the bodies of their fallen brethren (or any humans that tried to invade their homes). Generally speaking, this falls deeply into the nature of opportunistic cannibalism: They are dead anyway, so why let this perfectly good meat go to waste?
Lizardfolk remain neutral despite such acts, because it is a needed action where they live.
Dunno, with Urgathoa, I've run into similar issues. She's very pro-undeath, so any action that increases the lifespan of party members seems rather iffy as her cleric. Even selective channel on her negative energy seems iffy. Urgathoa doesn't strike me as sadistic, even if she's evil, she's just loves her undeath.
Zon Kuthon, on the other hand, would totally support healing magic, as it means they can recieve more pain without dying.
Urgathoa is also big on gluttony though. I think it would not be undue for a vampire worshiper to use various spells in order to make sure the 'cattle' can continue to be 'milked' to fill the wineglass.
Hard to say how it works in party play though. Maybe the excuse that you are letting these sheep to grow up so that they make a finer undead and/or meal. You want that barbarian to get some more levels so he raises his base strength and get leaner meat, right? I think this is the kind of thing you need to keep in mind when you are playing evil characters- how to excuse their work in the party by furthering their general goals and/or obsesssions.
|
|
@Iemeres: Was kinda under the impression that in the mystery scenario, the choices are cannibalism and starving to death. Paladins would definitely choose fasting (starving) and prayer. And although giving up their body to others is self-sacrifice, I think Paladins would still be against it, as they'd be enabling and encouraging evil behaviour in others.
As an aside, I personally don't really see cannibalism as evil, but I definitely think Good deities would be opposed to it. Cannibalism is definitely unlawful behaviour and I would argue that no lawfully aligned cities should allow cannibalism (hard to create order when your subjects are eating eachother). I think even Lawful Evil cities would be mostly opposed to cannibalism (some exceptions, probably).
Regarding Urgathoa and Vampires, I believe Vampires fall into the domain of Zura, not Urgathoa. There's proably some crossing over, but Urgathoa is probably against the idea of raising humans for food, as she's more along the lines of "if you run out of humans in one town, go to the next town." Urgathoa is more about creating lots of undead, so in that respect, Vampires are unlikely to follow her due to the inherent conflict of interest.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Next up: is eating babies wrong as long as you have somebody else cook it for you?That would be a perspective thing. Is the act of eating babies the evil thing, or is the killing/cooking them the evil action?
There's an interesting Essay on this topic, called "A Modest Proposal." Worth reading, though beware that the Author isn't serious, despite no hint of it in the text.
Yes, I was referencing that.
The idea of the proposal was to get other people thinking about solutions. It was basically saying "Well yeah my idea is terrible, so what are your ideas?"