3.5/ Pathfinder Why is the spell destruction not in the destruction domain?
wingsandsword
Legend
Because, name aside, it's a poor example of a "destruction" spell and it's actually pretty weak for a 7th level spell, just another "save or die" death effect.
The whole point of "Destruction" is that it's the reverse of Resurrection. Reversed spells weren't so obvious in 3rd edition and later, but it was explicit in 1e and 2e that Destruction was simply a Cleric memorizing the reverse of Resurrection. They could have called it "Kill" (except for overlap with Power Word: Kill), and "Slay Living" was taken by the reverse of Raise Dead.
So, name aside, as an example of just raw destruction there were spells that could cause a lot more mayhem and destruction at that level and would be more suitable for the theme than a simple save-or-die effect.
The whole point of "Destruction" is that it's the reverse of Resurrection. Reversed spells weren't so obvious in 3rd edition and later, but it was explicit in 1e and 2e that Destruction was simply a Cleric memorizing the reverse of Resurrection. They could have called it "Kill" (except for overlap with Power Word: Kill), and "Slay Living" was taken by the reverse of Raise Dead.
So, name aside, as an example of just raw destruction there were spells that could cause a lot more mayhem and destruction at that level and would be more suitable for the theme than a simple save-or-die effect.
