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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="The Sigil" data-source="post: 155715" data-attributes="member: 2013">FWIW...FWIW, here are my reactions...The backwards-compatible issue is a good one.  Wizards and even alchemists of nearly all skill levels, from master to neophyte, have been depicted as "playing God" in fantasy texts.  Gaining the Feat ought to be comparatively easy, even if producing the desired results is not.There is one important difference here, and that is the ability to procreate.  Create 2 golems and you have 2 golems.  Create 2 magical beasts and you have... potentially unlimited magical beasts (assuming you created male/female ;-) ).There are many things PCs shouldn't be able to do.  While morally this may be one of them, I would suggest that anything modern man is capable of with technology, fantasy man should be capable of with magic (after, all, "sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic" - and I might add that sufficiently advanced magic is indistinguishable from technology).Not entirely happy with that, but I see your reasoning.  Arbitrary exclusion, though, seems, well, arbitrary. ;-)Seemed reasonable to me.  I would probably add a Synergy bonus for a high Profession: Alchemy skill, myself.As far as the successes/failures go, tough to adjudicate.  I would probably bump all the DCs up by 5, with a critical success (only) indicating the creation of a creature that can procreate (i.e., mixing the parts is easy, getting the genetic code right is tough).Gonna have to let this one bang around in my head a bit longer before I have more to say, but that's my "gut reaction."  I do like the Feat, though I think it may require a few tweaks before it reaches a point that I want to allow it IMC.  YMMV.--The Sigil</blockquote>

Verification