Can good clerics use evil spells from scrolls?

[Jhaelen]

I don't even support Animate dead as being an evil spell.

???
Well, it has the [Evil] descriptor. Creating/commanding undead is considered evil, because undead are considered evil - regardless of their alignment (see the Detect Evil description).

This is not a question of whether casting a spell is considered an evil act. Spells with the [Evil] descriptor are inherently evil - even if they are used for good ends. This works both ways, of course.

Casting spells for an evil purpose is not covered by this particular rule. It's just a question if it's covered by the cleric's codex. In cause of doubt, I recommend wearing a 'Phylactery of Faithfulness'

 

[mvincent]

I personally would handle it similarly to a wizard trying to use a scroll from his prohibited school... except (if successful) the cleric will also have "some 'splainin to do".

 

[Anthelios]

I can see, from a rules standpoint, that using UMD or other levels in a spellcasting class would allow you to cast evil spells as a good cleric.

It just doesn't mesh with my perception of a good cleric. A cleric is blessed by the might of his god to do things in accordance to his god's wishes. Trying to sidestep the rule is worse than asking for permission to cast the spell and being denied.

According to the dieties and demigods book, all the gods and "See and hear" their followers all the time. Would a god let you break your vows so long as you dont use his power to do it? Yes. But would he be mad? Yes.

It would be like if a child, knowing his parents wont let him get a tattoo at a tattoo parlor instead has his friend give him one in his basement, because its not "Getting one at the tattoo parlor".

It all comes down to one question. In your games, are your clerics responsible for their actions as a whole, or only their divine magic? Does a god punish a LG wizard 1/cleric 19 for picking up a wand of lightning bolt and blasting 17 innocent, puppy-holding orphans to death?

 

[mvincent]

I can see, from a rules standpoint, that using UMD or other levels in a spellcasting class would allow you to cast evil spells as a good cleric.

It just doesn't mesh with my perception of a good cleric.

Well, mechanically a cleric shouldn't be less capable of using UMD than a non-spellcaster (even if his god was honked off at him).

It stands to reason that a cleric could do this without godly approve... whether he would is left the role-player. Personally I feel that say, a Chaotic Evil cleric might have every reason to cast protection from evil on himself (even though it is a 'Good' spell).

 

[Zurai]

This is a House Rules interpretation, not a RAW one:

Clerics cannot cast opposing alignment spells because their deity will refuse to grant the spell. The spells are demonstrably still on their spell list, they just cannot get them in their normal prepared spells without lots of extra effort.

A cleric COULD cast an opposed alignment spell through a wand, staff, runestaff, scroll, ring, etc... but his deity would almost certainly strip his Cleric abilities from him in response.

 

[Dross]

I tend to treat this prohibition as, effectively, "The spell is not on the cleric's class list". So a multiclassed NG Clr/Sor could cast Summon Monster to summon a Fiendish Dire Weasel as a Sorcerer spell, but not as a Cleric spell.

Based on this, the cleric could not use the scroll normally, but UMD would allow it with the normal "Activate Scroll" check... no emulation of alignment required.

I generally agree with Hyp, but have to add (mainly from a roleplaying perspective than a rules perspective) that:

I'd say that a cleric should be greatly disinclined to use any magic item that does something the cleric could not nominaly do (such as summoning a Fiendish Dire Weasel) without a very good reason.

But, theree is enough grey area for alternate rulings.

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

Well, mechanically a cleric shouldn't be less cable of using UMD than a non-spellcaster (even if his god was honked off at him).

Less cable?

 

[DiceGolem]

A cleric casts divine spells, which are drawn from the cleric spell list. However, his alignment may restrict him from casting certain spells opposed to his moral or ethical beliefs...

link

I think it's a clear cut case. All the spells are on their class list. A cleric will not cast an [Evil] descriptor spell if good natured, becuase they and their deity are against it on an ethical level.
I would say that it doesn't matter where you're casting the spells from, if it's an evil spell the cleric would face dire consequences.

 

[mvincent]

I think it's a clear cut case. All the spells are on their class list. A cleric will not cast an [Evil] descriptor spell if good natured, becuase they and their deity are against it on an ethical level.
I would say that it doesn't matter where you're casting the spells from, if it's an evil spell the cleric would face dire consequences.

Let's take the moral and ethical matters out of the equation (those things are somewhat outside of the mechanical rules and could be debated forever).

If a chaotic evil cleric wanted to use a wand of protection from evil on himself (maybe he's expecting to face devils or unruly 'allies'), could he with UMD? Without UMD?

 

[Hypersmurf]

A cleric will not cast an [Evil] descriptor spell if good natured, becuase they and their deity are against it on an ethical level.

It's not 'will not' or even 'may not', it's 'cannot'.

Whether the cleric wishes to or not, whether he's defying his ethics or not, he is incapable of casting the spell.

-Hyp.