Rasene Andu posted:
1. Bloodtrait/Bloodform
I don't think balance really comes into it with these two abilties. They are there for a specific reason, to provide for the transformation of characters into Awnsheghlien and Erhsheghlien (primarily NPCs too, not players). They are certainly powerful, but necessary. If you have any balance issues with other bloodline abilities let me know and I'll try to address them.
I believe all bood abilities should be balanced. If you feel that these abiltiies are not balanced, they should have not beed made blood abilities or should have been reworked into a balanced manner.
But I wasn't referring to them specifically, as I have simply written off my campaign. I was referring to other blood abiltiies dependant on them, such as Regeneration, Major Regeneration, and Invulnerability.
Generally speaking, I don't quite agree with several of the choices of balance in the blood abilities of the BRCS, but that's quite a long list to go through, and I have my own reasoning as far as balacne thay you may not accept. If you'd like to "compare notes" so to speak, you can download my version of the chapter at
My Webpage (it's not quite finished, but I posted it anyways)

2. Feats/Great Heritage/No ECL for minor scions.
Some feats will be reworked in the revised BRCS. I don't have the full list on me, but there are a few that need changing.
I agree.

[QOUTE] I have a lot of problems with the whole bloodline chapter ... The main thing I'd like to see is some reduction in the amount of material you have to wade through to determine your bloodline. A simple table like this would work better. [/QUOTE]
While simplicity is generally good, I like the idea of divorcing bloodline purity (that's how I call strength) from score. It opens up new options. That being said, your system is far simpler and may actually be more fitting of the concept of bloodlines.
I'm going to have to think about it.

3. No Monks
If you want Monks, then add them. End of story...
I am well aware of that. And I actually don't want them, so I'll leave it at that. (I was just doing my best to answer a question, I think cerilia is better off with no monks.)

5. Lesser Magic
I orginally thought the idea of cutting the bard spell list to just lesser magic spells a good idea. It does require some work, and you would need to introduce some new spells (perhaps some unique to bards) to replace those lost, but it is something I thought would work. No one else went with that idea at the time, but if I'm left to work on the revision of the BRCS on my own, it may be something I consider adding.
I think that rethinking just what lesser magic entails, and changing the classes to fit, would indeed be far superior to changing what lesser magic entails to fit the classes.

By the way, I'll set a tentative release date of the revised BRCS AND the Atlas of Cerilia of around january next year. Both book don't have many people still writing for them, so that has increased the time it will take to complete them.
That's good news in terms of having something to look forward to, but I'm sad to hear there are only a few good men

6. Nature=True Magic and Rangers and Druids.
I concor with your thoughts on this. Already dicussing this on another thread though.

7. Dwarves and Halflings.
From what I've seen of the revisions so far, nothing much has changed, apart from the damage reduction thingy (DR 4/slashing or piercing now, or something like that).
Halflings I also like, not a lot of major changes needed there.
I wasn't so much concerned about the mechanics as the flavor of the race (and the mechanics only to the extent they represent it).
The problem I have with dwarves is that the addition of arcane-abilties to them in 3e is a major change that the racial descriptions in BR basically shrug off. Compare this to FR, where the dwarves are explicitly said to only now have magic, and having none in the past.
I don't think this route is conductinve to BR, but I do think some rethinking of their role is required. I personally like the ideas of rune-sorcerers mentioned elsewhere.

8. Paladins and priests.
I also like the idea of paladins for all religions. As for priests/clerics, I'd have to say that the 2E rules for these speciality priest were unbalanced, but I did like the differences between the religions. I'm proposing changing the domains for the clerics to make them more unique (and to restrict certain news spells that I'm working on just to clerics of a certain faith). Another option is to have a different list of class skills for different faiths, or something like that. The Atlas will also feature some prestige classes for specific religions, but not one for each...
I agree with all points, except maybe the holy warriors. While I like the falvor, I am afraid of the effects this will have on the plurality of classes in the campaign.
(The problem is lesser with clerics if you limit the change to domain powres - customization already built in.)