Desecrate question

[RNightstalker]

So the beginning of the third paragraph:
"If the area contains an altar, shrine of other permanent fixture of a deity, pantheon, or higher power other than your patron, the desecrate spell instead curses the area, cutting off its connection with the associated deity or power..."
In a recent game I had an NPC bad guy cast Desecrate on a shrine of the PC Cleric's deity to cut off the connection, which I ruled cut off divine spells from that character while in the AOE.
Was that a proper use of the spell?

[Feantar]

Well... you turned a 2nd level spell into a selective anti magic field - which is, at least, a 5th level spell. So, yeah, mechanically it's overkill. Also, clerics don't need to cast their spells in areas specially dedicated to their deities, so it doesn't make much sense either way. Desecrate doesn't devote an area to Bob the Unliving, it just removes the, let's call it, temple aspect from a temple. Unless your clerics cannot use their spells outside their temples, that's an inappropriate result to the spell.


On the other hand, it is thematically appropriate, so if it offered a good feel for the scene, that's rule zero and absolutely valid. Just don't generally have desecrate work like that, otherwise you'll lose consistency.

[Jeraa]

So the beginning of the third paragraph:
"If the area contains an altar, shrine of other permanent fixture of a deity, pantheon, or higher power other than your patron, the desecrate spell instead curses the area, cutting off its connection with the associated deity or power..."
In a recent game I had an NPC bad guy cast Desecrate on a shrine of the PC Cleric's deity to cut off the connection, which I ruled cut off divine spells from that character while in the AOE.
Was that a proper use of the spell?

No. Once memorized, the spell is contained within the caster. No divine connection needed. No divine connection is needed to prepare spells either - it can be done anywhere. That use of the spell is ultimately more fluff than anything.

[denthor]

You assume that the alter had the opposite of descrate on it to begin with. To make undead less effective.

The 1st casting makes the ground normal. The alter may still be active. Just not as connected to the positive as before.


The second casting would start to take down the defense of the alter and help undead.

So yeah you over did it. A 4th level mage spell only stops incoming 3rd or less spells. May depending on your rules surpress a 3rd level or lower spell like displacement that enters the area. I personally would not like that ruling as a player.

[Zanos]

I assumed that language to mean that it cuts off the special connection between the deity and the location. This would prevent an altar from granting a blessing, or prevent the deity from viewing the area, perhaps. But the connection between a cleric and a deity can't be severed by a second level spell.

To flip the book on you, if the Big Evil Cult where all standing around a shrine to a Big Evil Deity, would you let a PC cast a consecrate or desecrate and have the Big Evil Cult all lose their divine powers?

[Crake]

You assume that the alter had the opposite of descrate on it to begin with. To make undead less effective.

The 1st casting makes the ground normal. The alter may still be active. Just not as connected to the positive as before.


The second casting would start to take down the defense of the alter and help undead.

So yeah you over did it. A 4th level mage spell only stops incoming 3rd or less spells. May depending on your rules surpress a 3rd level or lower spell like displacement that enters the area. I personally would not like that ruling as a player.

It's unlikely the altar was consecrated, considering it's a limited duration spell with a costly material component. You're probably thinking about hallow, which is an instantaneous spell, also with a costly material component, but once hallowed, an area is hallowed forever. The two spells however do not interact.