After some consideration, I don't think regenerate should any spell level less than 3. The spell Remove Blindness/Deafness is at that level and has the ability restore vision and hearing. Since I don't think regenerate should compete with that spell, it can do more than restore vision and hearing, I think the regenerate spell should be a 4th level spell. Since it would no longer be a 7th level spell, I think it should more limited, maybe restoring only 1 limb or organ per casting.
Removed a return to the previous tangent.
You can discuss concerns with moderation with us by using the community(at)paizo.com email address. Addressing moderation within threads often leads directly to the digression that happened here, and meta arguments are no more an improvement to the content of the thread.
cool, done with you guys
As of late, I've been thinking about the spell regenerate. The more I think about it, the more I'm left wondering if the spell regenerate should be a 7th level spell. Looking back at 2nd edition, it was a 7th level priest spell. Back then, priest spells only went up to 7th level so it was essentially a max level spell. Is this the reason its a 7th level spell? Because it was a 7th level spell in 2nd edition?
Considering that there are no rules for losing limbs and organs, does regenerate need to be a 7th level spell? The spell, restoration got lesser and greater versions. Not only that, but restoration used to be a 7th level spell. Greater restoration took that spot, letting restoration to become a 4th level spell, and lesser restoration took the 2nd level spell spot.
Generally speaking, most remedy spells get introduced (to clerics) around the level the affliction it cures is introduced. The only common mechanic that removes limbs is a sword of sharpness, which doesn't even exist in Pathfinder.
A few creatures exist that give effects that need regeneration to cure. Honestly, lowering the level wouldn't hurt but it also wouldn't make a significant difference in use.