would this be broken?

[geekintheground]

if we combined all the "protection from (alignment)" spells into one thing, and you picked which alignment when you prepare it (for wizards) or cast it (for sorcerers).

[Vhaidara]

So the way they work in the Neverwinter Nights games?

that's how I would run it. The exception would be that you cannot protect against your own alignment.

[Grizzled Gryphon]

For the wizard and sorcerer, it just adds a bit more diversity. For the waizrd, he would basically have one spell that does the job of several. In the long and the short of it, though, its not that bad. You free up casting slots for both the wizard and sorcerer, and the sorcerer can definitely use some diversity. That is probably the worst thing, here. You give the sorcerer the option of having a spell that has multiple uses, which would just make it more appealing for the sorcerer to take.

I don't see it as being game breaking, though.

[Vhaidara]

For the waizrd, he would basically have one spell that does the job of several.

I thought that was half of the wizard spells in existence.

[Chronos]

It would make it realistically possible for a sorcerer to take the Planar Binding spells.

[Brookshw]

that's how I would run it. The exception would be that you cannot protect against your own alignment.

Sounds good, and no, doesn't sound broken though I might add 1 or 2 to the spell level.

[TuggyNE]

if we combined all the "protection from (alignment)" spells into one thing, and you picked which alignment when you prepare it (for wizards) or cast it (for sorcerers).

It wouldn't be broken but it would make cleric alignment restrictions a little funkier, so there'd need to be verbiage for that.

[Humble Master]

It wouldn't be broken but it would make cleric alignment restrictions a little funkier, so there'd need to be verbiage for that.You could use something similar to the text in the Summon Monster line that says:


When you use a summoning spell to summon an air, chaotic, earth, evil, fire, good, lawful, or water creature, it is a spell of that type.

maybe


When you cast this spell it is a spell of the alignment type that opposes the alignment the spell wards against. For example if you cast this spell to ward against Evil it is treated as a Good spell.

Thus any Cleric can take this spell but they can only cast the versions that conform to their alignment.

[Rubik]

The exception would be that you cannot protect against your own alignment.So Evil spellcasters couldn't bind Evil creatures? I don't think that works.

Any spellcaster should be able to cast any version of the spell, except for those explicitly unable to cast spells of certain alignments (ie, not arcane casters).

[eggynack]

It wouldn't be broken, certainly. These spells weren't insanely powerful before, and the most important effects aren't that alignment dependent. They are powerful spells though, and I'm always hesitant to make things that are at a perfectly reasonable power level more powerful. For that reason, this isn't a change I would make to the game. Protection from X/magic circle against X aren't so situational that they need to be broadened.

[Vhaidara]

So Evil spellcasters couldn't bind Evil creatures? I don't think that works.

Any spellcaster should be able to cast any version of the spell, except for those explicitly unable to cast spells of certain alignments (ie, not arcane casters).

I forget that this problem arises with higher level conjuration. Never played in a campaign that got past level 12, and we had a blast mage in that one.

Also, if you compress the Protections into one spell, I would recommend doing the same with the Magic Circles, the Detect Alignments, Dispel Alignments, and the Holy Aura/Cloak of Chaos/Shield of Law/Unholy Aura sets as well.

[ericgrau]

Most of the time you can use protection from evil anyway, and it wasn't the greatest 1st level spell to begin with. Spell should stay 1st level IMO. Say that the descriptor changes depending on the option selected for cleric purposes, like fire shield (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/fireShield.htm).

[Kelb_Panthera]

Honestly, the proposed change is pretty thoroughly "meh."

Though, in fairness, the spells were pretty "meh" to begin with. In all likelihood this change won't even merit notice by anyone who doesn't plan on using planar binding early and often.