Take the 2-minute tour ×
Role-playing Games Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for gamemasters and players of tabletop, paper-and-pencil role-playing games. It's 100% free, no registration required.

Okay, I've created an Neutral Evil Cleric. I worship Auril, the Frostmaiden, who abhors fire. What should I do if I've taken the War domain, and I have Flamestrike? Would it lose the fire damage,and just be pure Divine Damage? Or would I be unable to cast it at all?

share|improve this question
2  
How are you getting the War domain? The sources that I'm finding say that Auril has the Storm and Winter domains, not War. How you get access to that domain may be important. –  DuckTapeAl Apr 14 at 6:29

1 Answer 1

By RAW, you can cast Flame Strike all you want.

This kind of restriction is technically a roleplaying thing. By the rules, there is nothing to prevent you from casting Flame Strike as a cleric of Auril. The only restrictions on what spells a cleric can cast based on his chosen deity are alignment-based, not based on energy types. However, you're likely going to want to ask your DM some specifics. It's likely that your DM will have a problem with it if your ice cleric casts a lot of fire spells.

Here's how I would run it, if I were your DM. I would give you two choices.

Option 1 would be to leave the spell as is, and have it upset your god when you cast it. This way, you have access to a reasonably powerful fire spell, but you won't want to cast it very much, lest your god get really upset.

Option 2 would be to convert the spell entirely into Cold Strike rather than Flame Strike. It would work exactly like Flame Strike, just dealing cold damage instead. You can create this effect anyway with the metamagic feat Elemental Substitution (Complete Arcane, p79), so it's likely not unbalanced. This option also fits best with the whole ice theme. You might want to run this by your DM and see what they think of it.

The spell would definitely not be converted entirely to divine damage. Divine damage is pretty powerful, and being able to do 1d6/level of damage without any kind of resistance being applied is quite a bit better than having half of that be subject to an elemental resistance.

share|improve this answer
    
Technically, cold damage is (generally) a bit superior to fire, since there are more monsters with fire resistance/immunity than there are with cold. It’s pretty close, though, and the theme of a campaign could easily sway that. –  KRyan Apr 14 at 12:06
    
I would go with the Upset God option. Just because a cleric supposedly has access to a spell, don't mean he is not bound by ethos. Bending the spells' element is also bad, because you take away the function of the feat. Clerics are NOT wizards. Clerics have to be mindful of what spells they pray for and cast. A funnier way was to create an Auril prestige class that has a granted power to convert fire to ice in spells. –  Mindwin Apr 14 at 14:26
    
I didn't even THINK about the Elemental Substitution feat. Thanks. I'll have to do that, and as for the War domain, above, how I got it, when I prestiged into Contemplative, I got an Extra Domain, when I ran in by the DM, I asked if I could take one that wasn't on the list. He said it was fine, since Auril only had two Domains. –  Chris Apr 14 at 15:17
    
@KRyan: Fire resistance is more common than cold resistance, true, but the difference isn't very big: rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/13608/… –  DuckTapeAl Apr 14 at 18:57
    
@DuckTapeal Of course; I did say just “a bit” and “pretty close.” –  KRyan Apr 14 at 23:01

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.