| Alzrius |
I could swear I recently saw a spell designed to cut a divine spellcaster off from their deity, thereby depriving them of their spellcasting ability.
Unfortunately, I can't find it now. I'm fairly confident that it was in a third-party supplement written for Pathfinder, but there's a chance it may have been 3.5.
Anyone know of anything like this?
| Mauril |
Well, in Pathfinder only, you can do it with Beguiling Gift and a Helm of Opposite Alignment. Hang onto the Helm, cast the spell and then offer the cursed item.
Alignment: A cleric's alignment must be within one step of her deity's, along either the law/chaos axis or the good/evil axis (see Additional Rules).
Also, depending on how one reads the spell Charm Person, one might be able to use Atonement to convert a person's alignment. Under strict RAW, the Charm X spells do not force the charmed to do anything, it just suggests a certain course of action rather persuasively.
| Bruunwald |
I've always had sort of a cheesy issue with the notion that cutting a cleric off from his god somehow immediately deprived him of spells.
Channeling energy, yes, I can see that. Domain powers, yes. Those are all "streaming" from the cleric's god, so-to-speak.
But a cleric memorizes spells. He downloads them to his hard drive. So to my mind, whatever a cleric had memorized at the time he was cut off, he still has until he uses them up.
Unless his god actively deprives him of those spells. Which any useful god would not do just because somebody else cast a spell on you.
| Alzrius |
said spell was in 3.5it was in the spell compendium.
it went with the image of the cleric being denied turning undead and being munched on....
That's the divine interdiction spell, which prevents a divine spellcaster from utilizing domain powers or being able to channel energy.
The spell I thought I saw somewhere actually cut off divine spellcasting ability.
| Alzrius |
I've always had sort of a cheesy issue with the notion that cutting a cleric off from his god somehow immediately deprived him of spells.
Channeling energy, yes, I can see that. Domain powers, yes. Those are all "streaming" from the cleric's god, so-to-speak.
But a cleric memorizes spells. He downloads them to his hard drive. So to my mind, whatever a cleric had memorized at the time he was cut off, he still has until he uses them up.
Unless his god actively deprives him of those spells. Which any useful god would not do just because somebody else cast a spell on you.
I don't disagree. Traditionally (I've seen this issue come up in odd cases across multiple editions of the game), spells that were prepared stayed prepared even if the god cut you off, died, or something else. You'd already received that energy, and could use it as you wished.
That said, presuming that I'm not misremembering, the spell that I saw didn't operate under that presumption.
| Drejk |
Get one antimagiced wizard and one antimagiced cleric. Stand them next to each other. Wizard's nonmagical AC will be probably worse than Cleric's, his attack roll worse, his melee damage probably too, well you get the idea. Add bonus points for catfight if both are female with higher than avarage Charisma.
| Sean K Reynolds Contributor |
Taking away a primary class feature with such a specifically targeted effect ("I cut off your divine spellcasting," "I block your arcane spellcasting," "I negate your bardic music," "you can no longer make attack rolls," "you can no longer sneak attack") is kind of a jerk thing to do and kind of bad game design as well.
A general effect that happens to have that outcome is okay (such as an antimagic field blocking spellcasting, a hold person making a fighter unable to attack, silence negating bardic performance, and so on), but specifically targeting a class feature is generally very metagame-ish and should be discouraged.
Kthulhu
|
I've always had sort of a cheesy issue with the notion that cutting a cleric off from his god somehow immediately deprived him of spells.
Channeling energy, yes, I can see that. Domain powers, yes. Those are all "streaming" from the cleric's god, so-to-speak.
But a cleric memorizes spells. He downloads them to his hard drive. So to my mind, whatever a cleric had memorized at the time he was cut off, he still has until he uses them up.
Unless his god actively deprives him of those spells. Which any useful god would not do just because somebody else cast a spell on you.
One of the reasons I've never liked divine spellcasters being prepared spellcasters. You can only remember so many prayers per day? Seems goofy to me.
| Alzrius |
Taking away a primary class feature with such a specifically targeted effect ("I cut off your divine spellcasting," "I block your arcane spellcasting," "I negate your bardic music," "you can no longer make attack rolls," "you can no longer sneak attack") is kind of a jerk thing to do and kind of bad game design as well.
A general effect that happens to have that outcome is okay (such as an antimagic field blocking spellcasting, a hold person making a fighter unable to attack, silence negating bardic performance, and so on), but specifically targeting a class feature is generally very metagame-ish and should be discouraged.
It'd certainly be a high-level spell to target a major class ability like that, but I don't think it's necessarily any worse than a spell that kills a target or takes them out of combat completely in one shot (e.g. imprisonment).
Likewise, if you can rationalize something in-game, then I wouldn't call it metagame-ish. Divine spellcasters draw their power from their connection with their god - sever the connection, and they've lost the majority of their power. It makes sense from an in-game and meta-game standpoint.
Just don't make the spell last very long (1 round/level seems appropriate), make sure a saving throw can negate it and its subject to spell resistance, and have it be of such a high level that preparing or learning is a considerable investment, and I'd call it balanced.
Monte Cook wrote (in the Book of Eldritch Might) the chains of antimagic spell, which wrap a character in chains and not only expressly leaves the character helpless, but also affected as though in their own personal antimagic field. That's a spell that affects the basic class features of all spellcasters - I'd hardly call it meta-gamish if it only affected arcane spellcasters instead of all of them.
In other words, the distinction between something that "happens to have the outcome" of blocking a class's primary abilities, and a spell specifically designed to do just that, seems completely arbitrary to me.
| hunter1828 |
I could swear I recently saw a spell designed to cut a divine spellcaster off from their deity, thereby depriving them of their spellcasting ability.
Unfortunately, I can't find it now. I'm fairly confident that it was in a third-party supplement written for Pathfinder, but there's a chance it may have been 3.5.
Anyone know of anything like this?
In our Book of Divine Magic there is the 9th level cleric spell excommunication, which does just that, but it has to be cast by someone of the same faith as the target - so not really a good combat spell.