Good sorcerers can't cast [Evil] spells!

[wildstarsreach]

Swap the sample character for a Wizard/Bard, and sidestep the issue.

"A wizard must choose and prepare her spells ahead of time"; "A bard can cast any spell he knows without preparing it ahead of time".

If the character is a Wizard/Bard, can he cast wizard spells he knows without preparing them? Must he choose and prepare his bard spells?

-Hyp.

Here's where I stand on it, "Class abilities are only referred to that class unless it says otherwise."

Here's an example of explicit and on explicit wording. The feats Extra Spell and Expanded Psionic Knowledge. Bot have basically the same requirements but have vasting diffent affects. Extra spell allow you to learn an extra spell. Ruling from FAQ states that it must be a spell within your class list. Now the wording of the feat has been argued that it should let you learn outside or your class list by possible implication without explicitely stating it so FAQ is preserving a conservative view what is worded. Expanded Psionics Knowledge explicitely gives the ability to learn powers even outside of your class.

Two similar feats but simple wording gives to completely different results.

The spontaneous casting only applies to that classes spells. You could not spontaneously cast arcane spell from another class.

To further add about spell learning, as a cleric, I said good god only give you healing of beneficial spells. You cannot pray and use my energy to do evil. Now from arcane spells you learn through knowledge and not my grace and power, you can learn to cast evil spells. If you cast them, then you would violate my covenant that I give you your clarical spell and must atone to restore my connection. I don't punish you for your learning. Only your actions.

 

[RigaMortus2]

Here's where I stand on it, "Class abilities are only referred to that class unless it says otherwise."

Here's an example of explicit and on explicit wording. The feats Extra Spell and Expanded Psionic Knowledge. Bot have basically the same requirements but have vasting diffent affects. Extra spell allow you to learn an extra spell. Ruling from FAQ states that it must be a spell within your class list. Now the wording of the feat has been argued that it should let you learn outside or your class list by possible implication without explicitely stating it so FAQ is preserving a conservative view what is worded. Expanded Psionics Knowledge explicitely gives the ability to learn powers even outside of your class.

Two similar feats but simple wording gives to completely different results.

Now I see this as an example of the FAQ actually doing it's job. It is clarifying am ambiguity in the rules. Extra Spell doesn't say you can pick from ANY spell list, but it also doesn't say you have to pick from one of your classes spell lists. Since it is ambiguous, they clarified.


Note: You could also get into the debate that you can learn the spell via Extra Spell feat, but it doesn't add it to your spells known, and as such, you can't cast it.


It's the same with Cleaving off an AoO. It doesn't say you can, but it doesn't say you can't. The question was raised, the FAQ answered.

The spontaneous casting only applies to that classes spells. You could not spontaneously cast arcane spell from another class.

To further add about spell learning, as a cleric, I said good god only give you healing of beneficial spells. You cannot pray and use my energy to do evil. Now from arcane spells you learn through knowledge and not my grace and power, you can learn to cast evil spells. If you cast them, then you would violate my covenant that I give you your clarical spell and must atone to restore my connection. I don't punish you for your learning. Only your actions.

I pretty much agree with this.

 

[Starglim]

edit: should have read the question.

A cleric (and, by inheritance, a ranger) not being permitted to cast spells of an opposite alignment descriptor is not a special restriction. It's merely a class feature.

As has been pointed out on many other occasions, class features that modify the spellcasting of one class do not apply to other spellcasting classes that the character may have.

Your point [4] is in error.

Also, what Li Shenron said.

 

[irdeggman]

Can a wizard/paladin cast a spell with the Evil descriptor?

Or does this restriction only apply to class functions?

from the SRD:

Ex-Clerics
A cleric who grossly violates the code of conduct required by his god loses all spells and class features, except for armor and shield proficiencies and proficiency with simple weapons. He cannot thereafter gain levels as a cleric of that god until he atones (see the atonement spell description).

From the PHB:

Ex-Clerics
A cleric who grossly violates the code of conduct required by his god (generally by acting in ways opposed to the god’s alignment or purposes) loses all spells and class features, except for armor and shield proficiencies and proficiency with simple weapons. He cannot thereafter gain levels as a cleric of that god until he atones.

From the SRD:

[DESCRIPTOR]
Appearing on the same line as the school and subschool, when applicable, is a descriptor that further categorizes the spell in some way. Some spells have more than one descriptor.

The descriptors are acid, air, chaotic, cold, darkness, death, earth, electricity, evil, fear, fire, force, good, language-dependent, lawful, light, mind-affecting, sonic, and water.

Most of these descriptors have no game effect by themselves, but they govern how the spell interacts with other spells, with special abilities, with unusual creatures, with alignment, and so on.

A language-dependent spell uses intelligible language as a medium for communication. If the target cannot understand or cannot hear what the caster of a language-dependant spell says the spell fails.

A mind-affecting spell works only against creatures with an Intelligence score of 1 or higher.

So is casting an evil spell an evil act? {That has been the subject of very long deabtes on these boards}.

But more specifically is it contrary to a good cleric's code of conduct (and in opposition to his deity's alignment and/or goals)?

 

[Felix]

But more specifically is it contrary to a good cleric's code of conduct

It may be. Depends on the god and how often you act in ways opposed to the god's alignment.

For some reason, it strikes me that Kord will be less concerned with the use of Protection from Good when being attacked by stupid Paladins than will Heironeous.

 

[pallandrome]

This may be completely off topic, but in my campaign, any paladin stupid enough to attack someone who doesn't deserve it, doesn't get to stay a paladin for very long.

 

[IanB]

To add a little fuel to the "Is casting an [Evil] spell an evil act?" debate, the new Malconvoker prestige class in Complete Scoundrel contains some wording in one of the class abilities that implies that casting [Evil] summoning spells, at least, normally IS an evil act.

I don't have it at hand, but one of their class abilities prevents them from undergoing alignment change as a result of casting [Evil] summoning spells (and also removes the restriction on good clerics summoning evil creatures.)

 

[Vegepygmy]

As has been pointed out on many other occasions, class features that modify the spellcasting of one class do not apply to other spellcasting classes that the character may have.

Now this is what I'm looking for: where exactly has this been officially pointed out?

Your point [4] is in error.

It's not my point [4]!

 

[Vegepygmy]

To add a little fuel to the "Is casting an [Evil] spell an evil act?" debate...

Please don't. That's not relevant to the topic of this thread.

 

[Starglim]

Now this is what I'm looking for: where exactly has this been officially pointed out?

Hm. This seems to support it weakly:

The character gains spells from all of his or her spellcasting classes .. Since the spell's effect is based on the class level of the caster, the player must keep track of whether the character is preparing and casting protection from elements as a ranger or as a druid.

The character gains spells from his sorcerer class separately from his ranger class, and even if he could not have gained those spells from his ranger class. "The spell's effect" is not necessarily confined to caster level.

However, to be honest, there's an earlier passage under Classes that would seem to allow class features to impose restrictions. The question is whether those are always special restrictions that carry through to all multiclass characters.

edit:

known spell: A spell that an arcane caster has learned and can prepare .. For sorcerers and bards, knowing a spell means having selected it when acquiring new spells as a benefit of level advancement.

The cleric's class feature does not prevent the sorcerer from selecting a spell of an opposed alignment descriptor when he gains a level. A sorcerer can cast any spell that he knows at any time - unless, no doubt, he is unable to cast it for some specific reason, such as a special restriction, in the meaning of the multiclass rules.