Gramps's page

Extrapolating from Set's paradigm, this is what I come up with...

A good cleric, through divine grace, is able to tap more-or-less directly into the source of life, and "metabolize" it so that any living creature can directly benefit from it. However, when used to harm undead, this same life energy is essentially operating as a fire hose (much like Ironicdisaster details above). Too much of a good thing is, in fact, a bad thing.

Conversely, an evil cleric would essentially be drawing the ambient life energy into himself and making a "donation" or offering to the deity he serves (funneling that life force directly to his deity of choice in a sort of corrupt Thanksgiving... "Thank you, oh mighty Evilness, for the power you have granted your humble servant..."). When used to "heal" the undead, however, the way it works is as a perversion of what a good cleric does; the evil cleric steals and then "metabolizes" the life energy and immediately turns that same energy around and "feeds" it to his undead minions (or masters, whatever).

Looking at the abilities this way changes nothing mechanically, but completely alters the way we would view the game world.

A very valid point. I, too, remember said villain in the Pathfinder issue you mention. I thought it was a fine touch and worthy of the effort.

I have always found that it is quite difficult to make experienced gamers squirm, and the undead are not something that evokes the proper degree of... concern that they deserve.

Perhaps a general re-evaluation of the undead type is in order. Perhaps something like Unholy Fortitude is a step in the right direction. Or maybe grant most undead some basic damage reduction that cannot be overcome other than by brute force (i.e. as the Barbarian class feature).

I would suggest the DC be either 20 or 25 minimum, and then the identify spell has use, and the skill Appraise requires some effort. With a base DC 20 + caster level of the item, a 5th level wizard can identify any CL 1 item, without identify, and a 1st level wizard can identify any CL 7 or lower item with identify, all of them taking 10. Seems reasonable to me.

I very much like that take. A base DC of 20 would do nicely.

I'm going with the half-elves and half-orcs are it's own race, but way in the past they were results of misbehavin'.

Here is another example of how "half-breeds" could be nothing more than the result of unusual environmental factors.

In the Pathfinder setting of Golarion, there are elves who grew up among humans, the so-called Forlorn. I played in a campaign once where the opposite occured, human children being raised in elven lands. These people, while genetically still human, were refered to as "half-elves" by their human kin. As a result of their upbringing they had a very different view of the world from most humans. Nearly any aspect of the race can be rationalized to some degree. The resistance to sleep, for example. This could be a special kind of awareness that developed while dealing with the esoteric elven life-style.

A similar arguement can be made for those lovely half-orcs. Perhaps a tribe takes prisoners for slave labor. The children that grow up in such an environment would certainly not qualify as 'stable' in human lands. The kind of brutality the child had to endure at the hands of the orc whelps would leave more than just physical scars. Here is another situation where the racial abilities of the "half-orc" can be explained in a different way. Darkvision, while not something associated with the nearly blind race of humans, would become a necessary survival trait in the tribal slave pens. Perhaps the natural radiation from the Underdark alters the way the children develop visual senses while still in the womb.

Again, a little imagination goes a long way. This is, after all, Role-Playing we're talking about, no?

...in any game a DM can restrict it to just the arcane and destined bloodlines if they don't want sorcerer magic to come from ancestry...

I'm not picking on lastknightleft here, but the above quote perfectly outlines one of my personal peeves with the way (seemingly) most players view sorcerers. Who's to say that a sorcerer with the Abberant bloodline actually has abberant blood?

Example 1: I have a PC Sorcerer with the Abberant bloodline. How did this come to pass? The character's mother was once a prisoner of an aboleth. During her years of servitude, in a desire to have "home grown" slaves, the aboleth encouraged it's captives to breed. Simply by close association with the aboleth during gestation the child, in a not-too-uncommon occurance, is born with sorcerous potential.

I mean really, an aboleth and a human? The physics alone boggle the mind!

Example 2: Is anyone familiar with the term Changeling? No, I'm not talking about White Wolf. I'm talking ancient Celtic (& Germanic, Norse, et al) mythology. (Incidentally the original incarnation of the kobold has roots in Germanic faerie lore.)

Human baby is stolen (or exchanged, with the fey leaving one of their own in the infant's place) and raised by the faerie-folk. This child, genetically human in every way, grows up in the magic-infused world of the fey. So, while born with no supernatural abilities, this child (or Changeling) obsorbs some of the essence of the fey realms. Upon returning to the world of his origin he boasts powers that his kin had absolutely no part in.

Now, the physics of a human and a nymph... not so hard to imagine. But the "fey" bloodline does not necessitate such carnal relations.

In Conclusion
A "bloodline" can be taken as a bit of a misnomer. It does not require that said sorcerer's ancestors had odd tastes, or some unfortunate violence thrust upon her (pardon the euphamism). A "bloodline", in many cases, can simply be the result of unusual environmental factors.

Use your imaginations in this. I'm certain that a similar background can be devised for any of the bloodlines presented in the Pathfinder RPG.

I always found it rather ornerous to be shelling out 100gp a pop to cast Identify. Personally, as a DM, I find the change to be refreshing and welcome.

I'm not really sure where to post this, so General Discussion seems like the best place.

I recently noticed that the Ring of the Ram is missing from both the book and the Web Enhancement.

I figured I would point that out so it may be corrected in an updated Web Enhancement, or the final product, at the very least.

I'm hoping there will be some kind of fix in Alpha 3, but until then, what do we do for players who want to continue playing their rangers while everyone else has updated to Alpha 2 for testing? I don't want to be draconian and simply say, "No bards, druids, monks or rangers until Alpha 3!"

I can make certain assumptions about the direction of the ranger class for Alpha 3, and can make the necessary changes ahead of time (i.e. class skills, Hit Dice, et al). But the Track thing bugs me. A Dev Note would have been nice.

Other than that, I agree with the above poster... Jason has done a bang-up job thus far. There are still some kinks that need to be worked out, and that's why this forum is running. And that's also exactly why I mention the omission of the Track feat before Alpha 3 comes out.