| 3 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Forgive me if this is something that has already been covered, but I haven't been able to find any information on whether creatures affected by the spell awaken (or spells like anthropomorphic animal and reduce person made permanent) breed true, or if their children (or saplings) are normal members of their species. I can see how it could become quite ridiculous in cases like a single awakened tree, considering the incredible number of viable seeds any given tree puts out; in contrast, a reduced human giving birth to a normal-sized child would suffer from a host of potentially fatal complications.
Is there an official ruling on this, is it at the DM's discretion, or have I come to the wrong place with this question?
| 15 people marked this as a favorite. |
You should ask me.
Pathfinder is a fantasy RPG. As such, the rules regarding genetics are few and far between. I can only suggest you make it up. And I wouldn't worry much about the trees; while a tree can produce many viable seeds, most do not make it to adulthood. Though that may be how treants first came to be :)
My opinion (and its just that, opinion,. there are no "rules" on it that I know of)
A Permanent spell would only effect the creature it was cast on, not its proginy.
An Instaneous spell though actually alters the creature. Its permanent. Whatever it was before is gone and its now the new thing. It should -or at least could- be passed on genetically to new generations.
Of course, how that works in actual game play is still 100% up to the DM.
An Awakened squirrel mating with a normal squirrel could produce normals, awakened ones, or just marginally smarter ones or the Awakened one would be rendered completely infertile. Its just a DM call really.
I would probably go with either infertile or not letting it pass genetically, otherweise a few awakened creatures could very quickly overrun an ecosystem. Its all fine when you think about bears or something that reproduce relatively infrequently- think about it with rats or rabbits or something. Probably easier for campaign continuity to either have the spell(s) sterilize the creature or have it just not pass on through genetics.
That is, however, just my opinion.
-S
My opinion (and its just that, opinion,. there are no "rules" on it that I know of)
A Permanent spell would only effect the creature it was cast on, not its proginy.
An Instaneous spell though actually alters the creature. Its permanent. Whatever it was before is gone and its now the new thing. It should -or at least could- be passed on genetically to new generations.
Of course, how that works in actual game play is still 100% up to the DM.
An Awakened squirrel mating with a normal squirrel could produce normals, awakened ones, or just marginally smarter ones or the Awakened one would be rendered completely infertile. Its just a DM call really.
I would probably go with either infertile or not letting it pass genetically, otherweise a few awakened creatures could very quickly overrun an ecosystem. Its all fine when you think about bears or something that reproduce relatively infrequently- think about it with rats or rabbits or something. Probably easier for campaign continuity to either have the spell(s) sterilize the creature or have it just not pass on through genetics.
That is, however, just my opinion.
-S
Awakened Animal might pass it out if it mates with another Awakened Animal (already, smarter animal would probably be a magical beast anyway (by RAW)).
The following is just how I would rule as there are no rules that cover this.
I would rule permanent reduce person as the baby is reduced until delivery is completed at which point it returns to the normal size.
I would rule an Awakened creatures as: offspring are normal offspring and not awakened. My rationale for this is that other instantaneous effects do not pass on to offspring. Just because you have inherent bonuses to your ability scores does not mean your children will.
- Gauss
"Awakened" is not an Inherant state. It is a magical one. An "aura" so to speak.
Unless the alterations somehow became Inherrant (via a Wish spell or other effects capable if granting Inherant bonuses) the effect would not be hereditary.
"Awakened" is not an Inherant state. It is a magical one. An "aura" so to speak.
Unless the alterations somehow became Inherrant (via a Wish spell or other effects capable if granting Inherant bonuses) the effect would not be hereditary.
Well that's a tragic thought, innit? Ripe for drama. I approve.
"Awakened" is not an Inherant state. It is a magical one. An "aura" so to speak.
Unless the alterations somehow became Inherrant (via a Wish spell or other effects capable if granting Inherant bonuses) the effect would not be hereditary.
Awakening change the creature type from Animal to Magical Beast...
We might need a developer advice here (as the game is "PG-13" that kind of things might not be a priority)
"Awakened" is not an Inherant state. It is a magical one. An "aura" so to speak.
Unless the alterations somehow became Inherrant (via a Wish spell or other effects capable if granting Inherant bonuses) the effect would not be hereditary.
Awakening change the creature type from Animal to Magical Beast...
We might need a developer advice here (as the game is "PG-13" that kind of things might not be a priority)
That's in line with my thoughts on it; if it changes the fundamental nature of the creature so much that it counts as a different type, then it seems like an inherent, deep-seated change rather than just an aura. Furthermore, an Awakened tree doesn't just become intelligent, but gains the ability to move around, and develops "senses similar to a human's".
I also note that an Awakened animal gets the "Augmented Animal" subtype(s), and the description thereof says "Some creatures (those with an inherited template) are born with this subtype...". I take this to suggest that such augmentations are inheritable changes on a genetic level, rather than alterations on the level of surgery.
Ultimately, this turns into a general question about whether or which magic that transmutes a living creature does so on a genetic/hereditary level. There's implications and outright statements of such magic existing, such as in the origins of half-celestial or half-fiendish creatures, and "planetouched" races or half-dragons. If I remember correctly, Dragons Revisted specifically says that blue dragons are more prone to creating half-dragon and sorcerer descendants by magical alteration than by lowering themselves to breed with non-dragons; having to transmute each successive child isn't exactly the kind of economical decision I'd expect an instinctively greedy being like a dragon to make, if they can just alter one being to breed true.
|
Are you a follower of Lamashtu?
If you are thinking of interbreeding with animals, you will need this.
Unless the alterations somehow became Inherrant (via a Wish spell or other effects capable if granting Inherant bonuses) the effect would not be hereditary.Well that's a tragic thought, innit? Ripe for drama. I approve.
Sort of like a "Flowers for Algernon" spread out over generations.
How do you cope when both your parents and children all have INT 1 or 2? And would you even want to mate with an animal when you've become a magical beast yourself?
Are you a follower of Lamashtu?
If you are thinking of interbreeding with animals, you will need this.
I would have to assume that, despite the apparently exceptional ability of humans to interbreed with other races (ogres, elves, orcs...) a human could not breed with a magically altered animal. Particularly due to certain physiological incompatibilities...
In general, I'm approaching this from the assumption that a male of transmuted species is mating with a female of the same species (or another reproductively viable member of the same species, in cases where male/female does not apply, such as trees and slugs).
Now I'm wondering how this may relate to parthenogenetic species like the New Mexico whiptail lizard...
Anything that is not instantaneous change should be right out, permanency spell should do nothing for the progeny directly though I can imagine a higher % of sorcerers in such cases particulary of the arcane bloodline.
Instantaneous spells in general should probably also not do much unless it is apparent it would by the spells nature, though magical 'accidents' happen and sometimes it might stick, a wish or limited wish or similar powerful magic could potentially create a new or fertile species.
The Owlbear was created by magical experiments similar to a genetimutation. It was not the result of a single spell. Throughout D&D history the creation of a new species is always the result of complex magical manipulation. There has never been monster flavor/fluff saying species X was the result of one spell. For that reason such things normally fall in the realm of GM Fiat, nd there are no rules for it.
The elephant(just an example) might be a magical beast elephant, instead of an animal elephant, but I would say the offspring is still a normal elephant.
Now it does not make sense logically for a monster to have its type changed, but still give birth to the original type, but magic often does not make sense with regard to the rules, but like I said this is more of GM rules type situation.
I'd say one awakened mated with a normal animal has a 50/50 chance while two awakened mating produces an awakened creature.
I'd rule IMC that Awakened animals are not inter-fertile with non-awakened members of the same species, but two Awakened animals can breed true Magical Beast children.
So, to create a whole viable Awakened species, you have to Awaken enough different individuals to produce a genetically viable population (at 2,000 gp/individual), or inbreeding problems result in all sorts of disabilities after a few generations.
The number of druids both willing and able to spend tens or hundreds of thousands of GP on making a viable breeding population of intelligent magical beasts is few, especially given the vicious result of an ancient druid's effort with wolves — the worg.
|
I'd say one awakened mated with a normal animal has a 50/50 chance while two awakened mating produces an awakened creature.
that would quickly produce a population of awakened creatures that would eventually rival the normal. Given a thousand years, you would be hard pressed to find 'normal' versions of animals.
I'd say one awakened mated with a normal animal has a 50/50 chance while two awakened mating produces an awakened creature.that would quickly produce a population of awakened creatures that would eventually rival the normal. Given a thousand years, you would be hard pressed to find 'normal' versions of animals.
Maybe the ones born of the 50/50 chances to pass it drop to 25% and so on...
Unless awakened animals had some sort of selective disadvantage against ordinary animals. Perhaps the additional nutritional cost of brain growth?
I immediately thought "Well, it's a magical beast now, so it's type has changed..." That train of thought lead to "If the animal-turned-magical beast mated with another magical beast of its type, then the effect should be hereditary." It's almost like it's a new specie in that sense.
An awakened animal and an animal are probably still genetically compatible, but unless you pair two similarly altered sets of genetic material, then you're just going to get a regular animal. Of course, since it is awakened, the magical beast may not have any interest in bringing young into the world. A male may be more prone to do so than a female, seeing as (with most animals, though I can't say ALL) the female takes care of the young.
My suggestion would be to go with whatever option is most interesting to you and your players, as suits the tone of your campaign.
that would quickly produce a population of awakened creatures that would eventually rival the normal. Given a thousand years, you would be hard pressed to find 'normal' versions of animals.That's a level of biological reality that Pathfinder & Golarion don't seem to support. In any case, in reality, a large brain takes huge amounts of glucose to run; an awakened bison would in reality have a very hard time existing in the wild needing that many extra calories to survive on top of what a bison normally needs. Unless an awakened animal took up agriculture or became a largely superior hunter, awakening, assuming an Earth-normal brain for that level of intelligence, would not make a creature more effective. For most creatures, without hands, that's unlikely.
Magical Beasts and Fantasy settings tend to ignore those details, they get in the way of having fun.
I'd say one awakened mated with a normal animal has a 50/50 chance while two awakened mating produces an awakened creature.
I second this ruling.