Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Wik" data-source="post: 4012508" data-attributes="member: 40177">Yeah, I'd be careful of getting rid of spell access simply because it's unpleasant.&nbsp; You have clerics of Heironeous, a god of war.&nbsp; Sure, Contagion might be a bad, nasty spell, but it's a useful weapon in a fight, and is really no more evil than a siege (since, really, the point of a siege is to prevent supplies from reaching a place, and letting disease fester in a community) - and we all know how Heironeans see a siege, right?(that being said, there could be a problem if PCs use Contagion every fight.... it is, after all, an evil spell.&nbsp; But I think you should just follow the RAW, and let PCs' alignments slip if they insist on using the spell too often).As for Dispel Good?&nbsp; Why shouldn't they be able to dispel good?&nbsp; I mean, what if a Pelorite does something that really irks you?&nbsp; Getting rid of a good spell isn't evil, after all.&nbsp; Getting rid of spells for good guys goes back to the old 1e model, where many players would say &quot;Chaotic evil is the best alignment, because you can do anything&quot;.&nbsp; Putting a limitation on the PCs abilities simply because they chose to accept the moral boundaries of a good alignment is probably not the way to go, in my humble opinion.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Wik, post: 4012508, member: 40177"] Yeah, I'd be careful of getting rid of spell access simply because it's unpleasant. You have clerics of Heironeous, a god of war. Sure, Contagion might be a bad, nasty spell, but it's a useful weapon in a fight, and is really no more evil than a siege (since, really, the point of a siege is to prevent supplies from reaching a place, and letting disease fester in a community) - and we all know how Heironeans see a siege, right? (that being said, there could be a problem if PCs use Contagion every fight.... it is, after all, an evil spell. But I think you should just follow the RAW, and let PCs' alignments slip if they insist on using the spell too often). As for Dispel Good? Why shouldn't they be able to dispel good? I mean, what if a Pelorite does something that really irks you? Getting rid of a good spell isn't evil, after all. Getting rid of spells for good guys goes back to the old 1e model, where many players would say "Chaotic evil is the best alignment, because you can do anything". Putting a limitation on the PCs abilities simply because they chose to accept the moral boundaries of a good alignment is probably not the way to go, in my humble opinion. [/QUOTE]

Verification