Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="doctorbadwolf" data-source="post: 8529463" data-attributes="member: 6704184">But how does having spellcasting display the result of grandpa seducing a dragon? IMO, it doesn't. If the idea had never been published in dnd, and you were a PC in a game with any of my PCs, and you said &quot;My grandma is a silver dragon. See, I can cast spells!&quot; I'd just go, &quot;Um, my grandma is a halfling, and I can too.&quot; IMO there is no connection between the two.Rage is a transformation, first of all, so the feature dsplays having an unnatural origin much better than being able to do some stuff that any wizard can do. Second, I literally explicitly mentioned rage being recontextualized for this purpose in a previous post in this discussion. Transforming into a draconic creature, essentially becoming a were-dragon, makes a hell of a lot more sense for someone with a draconic ancestor (who clearly had to use some sort of transformative magic in order to accomplish making babies with a human in the first place), than imagining that having a white dragon ancestor makes you a very powerful spellcaster! In fact, it makes more sense for nearly every possible &quot;sorcerous&quot; origin to have a limited feature that eventually becomes less limited and then ultimately unlimited wherein you become more like the thing you are born from, than to be born a spellcaster. &quot;I was born of shades, and so I can...summon a shadow dog thing and cast absorb elements!&quot; vs&quot;I was born of shades, and a shade I can become, though it taxes me to do so. I worry, though. What does it mean to grow in this power, to become more and more of a shadow myself? Will I someday enter the shadow and never leave it?&quot;</blockquote>

[QUOTE="doctorbadwolf, post: 8529463, member: 6704184"] But how does having spellcasting display the result of grandpa seducing a dragon? IMO, it doesn't. If the idea had never been published in dnd, and you were a PC in a game with any of my PCs, and you said "My grandma is a silver dragon. See, I can cast spells!" I'd just go, "Um, my grandma is a halfling, and I can too." IMO there is no connection between the two. Rage is a transformation, first of all, so the feature dsplays having an unnatural origin much better than being able to do some stuff that any wizard can do. Second, I literally explicitly mentioned rage being recontextualized for this purpose in a previous post in this discussion. Transforming into a draconic creature, essentially becoming a were-dragon, makes a hell of a lot more sense for someone with a draconic ancestor (who clearly had to use some sort of transformative magic in order to accomplish making babies with a human in the first place), than imagining that having a white dragon ancestor makes you a very powerful spellcaster! In fact, it makes more sense for nearly every possible "sorcerous" origin to have a limited feature that eventually becomes less limited and then ultimately unlimited wherein you become more like the thing you are born from, than to be born a spellcaster. "I was born of shades, and so I can...summon a shadow dog thing and cast absorb elements!" vs "I was born of shades, and a shade I can become, though it taxes me to do so. I worry, though. What does it mean to grow in this power, to become more and more of a shadow myself? Will I someday enter the shadow and never leave it?" [/QUOTE]

Verification