Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
ShortQuests -- Pocket Sized Adventures! An all-new collection of digest-sized D&D adventures designed for 1-2 game sessions.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Spatzimaus" data-source="post: 906145" data-attributes="member: 3051">No, it shouldn't automatically go both ways.  Ideally, the thing you sacrifice should be worth more than the thing you gain, or else people would min/max automatically.  The Specialist Wizard rules, the rules for balancing racial stat modifiers, etc., are kind of like this.  So, +2 STR balances against -2 INT and -2 CHA, but the reverse isn't true (-2 STR doesn't balance +2 INT, +2 CHA).Then, there's the specifics of the situation.  If you have Rebuke/Control Undead, then Turn Undead is a useless ability.  So, Rebuke + Turn isn't a very good combination at all.  Also, how many Turns per day does he get?  Double, or not?  It makes a difference, thanks to the Feats out there  that let you burn Turn attempts.The point was, if Cure+Turn is a valid combo, and Inflict+Rebuke is a valid combo, and the two are reasonably balanced against the other (or so they claim, personally I think the evil guys get shafted), then how balanced is Cure+Inflict?The Good Cleric sacrifices Turn to get Inflict.  He now has no anti-Undead class ability, in exchange for a line of spells that really isn't that great.  Is this balanced?  I'd say so, but it depends somewhat on how many undead are in your campaign, and whether you allow the splatbook Divine (whatever) Feats.The Evil Cleric sacrifices Rebuke to get Cure.  Besides the fact that Rebuke/Command lets him actually COMMAND undead, evil clerics have all those nice undead-creating spells to begin with.  It's more likely to be useful.  It's still a step up in power, but like I said earlier, I thought the bad guys got a bit shafted on balance.</blockquote>

Verification