Why do all Sorcerers have dragon blood?

[danzibr]

I know dragons mate with anything with 2 legs (or not 2 legs), and they're magical and all, but why do Sorcerers necessarily have *dragon* ancestors? Plenty of other stuff can use magic. It seems like an odd restriction. Unless there's some variant in one of the books that I'm unaware of.

[umbergod]

Ita just the default fluff. Doesnt neccessarily mean every sorcerer needs to have a draconic ancestor tho

[PrismCat21]

They don't. It's just common.

[BWR]

I'm pretty sure they don't need to be dragon-blooded... (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/sorcerer/bloodlines/)

[Uncle Pine]

Sorcerers don't need a dragon ancestor, but many claim to have one.

[Max Caysey]

I know dragons mate with anything with 2 legs (or not 2 legs), and they're magical and all, but why do Sorcerers necessarily have *dragon* ancestors? Plenty of other stuff can use magic. It seems like an odd restriction. Unless there's some variant in one of the books that I'm unaware of.

They dont... Some have fey blood, dragon is just the most common.

[Necroticplague]

I know dragons mate with anything with 2 legs (or not 2 legs), and they're magical and all, but why do Sorcerers necessarily have *dragon* ancestors? Plenty of other stuff can use magic. It seems like an odd restriction. Unless there's some variant in one of the books that I'm unaware of.

Not all sorcerors have dragon blood. Many claim to, but it's not a prerequisite or a certainty. In PF, they definitely have SOMETHING in the blood, but there's a few dozen possibilitites (including "a powerful member of another spellcasting class"). In 3.5, there's less definition as to what sorcerers certainly are.

[Fizban]

They don't. Someone (several someones) at WotC can't stand the idea of people just being able to do magic, so they connected it to their dragon obsession and made a bajillion books saying sorcerers=dragon blood lolz.

Sorcerers can do magic for the same reason anyone else can do magic: it's magic. Anyone can do magic if circumstances (DM or player choice) permit.

[Melcar]

They don't. Someone (several someones) at WotC can't stand the idea of people just being able to do magic, so they connected it to their dragon obsession and made a bajillion books saying sorcerers=dragon blood lolz.

Sorcerers can do magic for the same reason anyone else can do magic: it's magic. Anyone can do magic if circumstances (DM or player choice) permit.

That's because is previous edition, a mage, was a person who had to have not only some form of magic blood but a lot of training and education. A lot like a jedi. Dragons are the creature most likely to interbreed with humans and dragons have ancestered a lot of creatures, so therefore there is a lot of dragonblood going around.

[Particle_Man]

Also, a lot of dragons cast sorcerer spells, so the idea could be "Hey I can cast this sorcerer magic like dragons, and I know that half-dragons exist . . . Gods, there must be a dragon in my family tree somewhere!"

[Malimar]

The answer in Pathfinder is decidedly "they don't", as linked above.


The answer in 3.5 is also "they don't", but you have to dig slightly more to see it. The default fluff is you've got magic in your blood, but the game makes no definite proclamations about how it got there unless you take sorcerer heritage feats, of which there are approximately five kinds:

PHb2 offers Celestial and Infernal heritage, Complete Mage offers Fey and Fiendish heritage. There may be more in more obscure sources.

Races of the Dragon and Complete Arcane and Dragon Magic do offer Draconic heritage feats, but unless you take the feats, you're not assumed to have such heritage.

[daremetoidareyo]

That's because is previous edition, a mage, was a person who had to have not only some form of magic blood but a lot of training and education. A lot like a jedi. Dragons are the creature most likely to interbreed with humans and dragons have ancestered a lot of creatures, so therefore there is a lot of dragonblood going around.

Classic anthropocentric bias. Humans are more likely to bang anything else and maybe they shouldn't dress so snazzy if they don't want a Dragon to misunderstandimate.

Half elves, half orcs, gully dwarves, etc. Humans , fiends, and dragons are so prolifically fecund with other species, that it's difficult to lay blame on one of those groups as a whole

[Particle_Man]

Humans can mate with a lot of humanoids, and some non-humanoids. They can also mate with celestials, fiends and dragons (but see below).

Celestials and Fiends can mate with any living, corporeal creature with an int of 4 or more. they can mate with Treants.

Dragons can mate with any living, corporeal creature. So anything that a fiend can mate with. But dragons are not limited to that. They can mate with sheep. They can mate with spiders. They can mate with oozes. I think the only things ruled out are constructs, undead, incorporeal entities, and objects.

Dragons win in the prolificity contest. If it is a contest.

[Buufreak]

maybe they shouldn't dress so snazzy if they don't want a Dragon to misunderstandimate.

This is the kind of logic that starts a fight, good sir.

[Psyren]

The answer in Pathfinder is decidedly "they don't", as linked above.


The answer in 3.5 is also "they don't", but you have to dig slightly more to see it. The default fluff is you've got magic in your blood, but the game makes no definite proclamations about how it got there unless you take sorcerer heritage feats, of which there are approximately five kinds:

PHb2 offers Celestial and Infernal heritage, Complete Mage offers Fey and Fiendish heritage. There may be more in more obscure sources.

Races of the Dragon and Complete Arcane and Dragon Magic do offer Draconic heritage feats, but unless you take the feats, you're not assumed to have such heritage.

Dragon Compendium has the 3.5 prototype for the various Sorcerer bloodlines seen in Pathfinder. Fitting considering that it is a Paizo product.

[Dagroth]

This is the kind of logic that starts a fight, good sir.

What, are you saying that humans don't dress snazzy?

[danzibr]

Well, that more than answers that (I suppose I should've specified 3.5). Thanks, folks!