Talk:Transfer Pregnancy (3.5e Spell)

Deletion Proposal

"This page was proposed for deletion on 15 Jun 2009 because: This would not work with any species I know of."

I read through the description several times. It works with humans, the standard SRD PC races, a lot of standard SRD monsters, and plenty of homebrew creatures. This is an interesting concept, if not appropriate for every campaign, and more explanation seems called for.--Ideasmith 21:52, 16 June 2009 (MDT)

As I have been working on this, as requested, I would appreciate having the deletion proposal removed.--Blackdragon8186 01:38, 20 June 2009 (MDT)

Some possible room for improvement

As currently worded, this spell can transfer a pregnancy to any creature. Giant ants, ghosts, and iron golems are all creatures per the rules, and thus can be impregnated by this spell. If this is your intent, I suggest specifying so very clearly, as many gamers will have trouble believing it. Otherwise, please specify what the limits are.

What are the game effects of an impregnated male being ripped open due to extended pregnancy?--Ideasmith 22:16, 16 June 2009 (MDT)

I created this spell mainly for use in campaigns where players have a pregnancy issue, knowing this to happen in some of mine, I was hoping that other users here would give me some helpful advice on how to improve it so I could add to it.

as for what happens when the male rips open, DM discretion I think is what is needed there, however if you have any advice please tell me, it would really help. however I will be making the the change on the species thing, didn't note that fact myself, thanks for pointing it out.

however I do not wish this page to get deleted. so keep I will be checking this page again tomorrow--blackdragon8186 18:55, 18 june 2009 (CT)

I just got in contact with a few of my other friends whom are also DM's I will be working out the effects of ripping open, and making sure to have the races bit worded corectly, hopefully tonight, if not soon.--blackdragon8186 19:24, 18 june 2009 (CT)

It really appears that this is really too complicated for what it needs to do to be functional. Make it Instantaneous duration with a target of a willing viable (able to have children, not too old or young) female target of the same type and subtypes as the caster. With instantaneous duration, it can't be dispelled, and with willing target only, no worries about saves and dismissals and confusion. No worries about unlike parents and male hosts (which is a big annoyance here for me). With these changes, you could even drop the spell level down. Also, trim down the descriptive text. There is some stuff in there about lactation and whatnot that really doesn't need to be in there. Hope this helps. --Ganteka 18:30, 18 June 2009 (MDT)

the idea's you offering is not what I am going for, complicated is kinda what happens, anyways the male bit is for some humor, gonna use it against a PC one day. however I do not want it to be a lower spell honestly, I like it where it is as is, though I do like those other notes, not too young or old, and healthy. thanks for that much, also I added a note at the bottom, saying the male part dose not have to be part of it, I hope that dose well for you --blackdragon8186 19:94, 18 June 2009 (CT)

For the 'ripping out' damage, I suggest 2d6 Constitution damage. --Ideasmith 17:41, 19 June 2009 (MDT)

Since “Transfers caster's unborn child into a surrogate parent “ is obviously not a descriptor, it should not occupy the descriptor's place in the spell format. --Ideasmith 17:41, 19 June 2009 (MDT)

I suggest changing the Target from “1 target creature” to “1 living creature of the same type as the caster” --Ideasmith 17:41, 19 June 2009 (MDT)

2d6 con seems about right, I will add that for now, and I will change the target--Blackdragon8186 00:31, 20 June 2009 (MDT)

Adult Content Template

Might i suggest adding the Template: Adult Content. This might actually give you more freedom with the descriptive text. plus it seems appropriate, i dont think the twelve year olds are incorporating pregnancy in their campaigns.Summerscythe 18:25, 19 June 2009 (MDT)

yes, that would not be a bad Idea, how do I add that template on? (and you would be surprised)--Blackdragon8186 00:31, 20 June 2009 (MDT)

looks like some one already did that, never mind then--Blackdragon8186 01:30, 20 June 2009 (MDT)