Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Sepulchrave II" data-source="post: 3109199" data-attributes="member: 4303">Unfortunately, I have been conditioned to view 'seminal' through the lens of gender; it's one of those words I try to avoid now  <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f641.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":(" title="Frown    :("  data-smilie="3"data-shortname=":(" /> . But I think (like 'television') a barbaric mixture would be acceptable. FWIW, I've thought about seed semiotics as well - their archetypal nature is almost reminiscent of the major arcana, or planetary symbolism. If these efforts ever came to print, art panels rendering the seeds in terms similar to tarot is very appealing.Good points. There is an alternative - although it feels something like an admission of failure - and that is to exclude true resurrection from the seed. Perhaps, like wish, miracle, shapechange and gate, true resurrection is beyond the pale. It is another 9th-level spell which 'breaks the rules' so completely that accommodating it is more trouble than it's worth. It's notable that the true resurrection effect isn't included in the [life] seed in the ELH - although that's more likely to be an oversight.If we exclude true resurrection it does avoid the problem of an arcane caster being able to perform it. This kind of rings true; a degree of divine intervention (like miracle) which it is simply impossible for arcane magic to duplicate. It is beyond the remit of wish. The problem with this is that its just so damn routine to 'true res.' someone at epic levels. It would have been so much better if true resurrection had never been, and a clause added to miracle to replicate the effect: the DM would at least have more latitude in making demands upon the mortal who invokes the gods this way. Meh.</blockquote>

Verification