Dragonwrought kobold

[umbergod]

*rips feathers off of a chicken* BEHOLD A MAN!

Fortunately I keep my feathers numbered for just such an occasion

[Mato]

To be fair, he's made this argument the entire time and no one's addressed it. As they age, Dragonwrought Kobolds gain mental stats but do not lose physical stats. In this sense, they gain in power as they age.

No one has ignore it and every single time someone brings up how true dragon's obtain hit dice from their age they are discussing this.

If you have an entry that says you gain power and another entry that says you gain power because you gain hit dice these two entries say and mean the same thing, one is just more specific than the other and in D&D a more specific entry has a higher rule priority if anything were to contradict it's self. The belief that you can ignore other entries and cherry pick ambiguous terms to redefine them as you desire is how most rule debates go and the reason one side will always be incorrect from any standpoint other than their own.

We as a collective community need to hold WOTC responsible for this mess and get definitive answers from the creators, to put an end to this mess. Sadly, i dont see that happening, and knowing the 3.0/3.5 community, there would be those that still disagree

The people in this community is responsible for this mess.

WotC has provided definitive answers on the subject in the rule books as well which have been posted and the intention is painfully clear even to generally everyone that argues DWKs should be a thing can admit it (but they also cowardly blame someone who won't defend them selves for it, like wotc). But they have tried to educate DMs on how to handle the rule system, that players have to have rules to do something, how to maintain balance and what they should ask them selves when they try to change things, how to admit your mistakes and how to deal with bad people, and how vague terms just are not that useful.

However the people in the community often feel as if they are a definitive expert on a subject and all other people are incompetent. People these days are extremely quick so share their opinion but they never want to hear anyone else's. I think this is due to places like this. In real life if I disagreed with someone I'd face the consequences of losing contact with them or earning their irritability making things problematic if we have to interact together such as work. But when you post on a forum you're not trying to talk with someone, you're posting your thoughts for others to hear. If they disagree you can just find someone else to replace them so just block/ignore them and move on. And this is a self perpetuating system, anyone that disagrees can become replaced by someone who does and you'll use their acceptance of it to believe you're right.

This is why certain things are the way they are, flat-earthers, Westboro, neonazis, antivaxxers, kobolds, and so on. And because they are more than tolerated in some areas they can continue to grow like an infection until something bad happens. Often, like here, they are even encouraged. Like this subforum is ran by a guy who wrote content for D&D and it holds a lot of rule-based debates but no one has even said you need to be logical in your debate tactics. Instead bait-and-switch tactics are used to bully people into hateful responses causing them to be banned from discussion. In places that use archaic rules of behavior, trolling is the only method of accomplishing anything and it becomes a positive thing to aspire to.

The problem is you. It's the guy that posted above me, it's the guy that posted below me, the moderators & administrators, and sometimes it's even me too. But until you can admit that you are just as bad as you claim others to be and I can tell you from experience that even if you can admit to it it's far to easy to fall down to their level again. It doesn't mean you should forgo trying through.

[Bartmanhomer]

No one has ignore it and every single time someone brings up how true dragon's obtain hit dice from their age they are discussing this.

If you have an entry that says you gain power and another entry that says you gain power because you gain hit dice these two entries say and mean the same thing, one is just more specific than the other and in D&D a more specific entry has a higher rule priority if anything were to contradict it's self. The belief that you can ignore other entries and cherry pick ambiguous terms to redefine them as you desire is how most rule debates go and the reason one side will always be incorrect from any standpoint other than their own.

The people in this community is responsible for this mess.

WotC has provided definitive answers on the subject in the rule books as well which have been posted and the intention is painfully clear even to generally everyone that argues DWKs should be a thing can admit it (but they also cowardly blame someone who won't defend them selves for it, like wotc). But they have tried to educate DMs on how to handle the rule system, that players have to have rules to do something, how to maintain balance and what they should ask them selves when they try to change things, how to admit your mistakes and how to deal with bad people, and how vague terms just are not that useful.

However the people in the community often feel as if they are a definitive expert on a subject and all other people are incompetent. People these days are extremely quick so share their opinion but they never want to hear anyone else's. I think this is due to places like this. In real life if I disagreed with someone I'd face the consequences of losing contact with them or earning their irritability making things problematic if we have to interact together such as work. But when you post on a forum you're not trying to talk with someone, you're posting your thoughts for others to hear. If they disagree you can just find someone else to replace them so just block/ignore them and move on. And this is a self perpetuating system, anyone that disagrees can become replaced by someone who does and you'll use their acceptance of it to believe you're right.

This is why certain things are the way they are, flat-earthers, Westboro, neonazis, antivaxxers, kobolds, and so on. And because they are more than tolerated in some areas they can continue to grow like an infection until something bad happens. Often, like here, they are even encouraged. Like this subforum is ran by a guy who wrote content for D&D and it holds a lot of rule-based debates but no one has even said you need to be logical in your debate tactics. Instead bait-and-switch tactics are used to bully people into hateful responses causing them to be banned from discussion. In places that use archaic rules of behavior, trolling is the only method of accomplishing anything and it becomes a positive thing to aspire to.

The problem is you. It's the guy that posted above me, it's the guy that posted below me, the moderators & administrators, and sometimes it's even me too. But until you can admit that you are just as bad as you claim others to be and I can tell you from experience that even if you can admit to it it's far to easy to fall down to their level again. It doesn't mean you should forgo trying through.

I agree with you. You made so many good points with this. I mean the creators were very clear on Dragonwrought Kobolds and so many Players and DM really misunderstood and take it to the next level.

[Gruftzwerg]

At first thx for Doctor Despair for pointing out why I am repeating myself and feel that my point haven't been addressed.
btw, the name fits the situation very much^^ I had to lol ;)

Age categories that aren't a part of the dragonwrought feat or the dragon type it grants, but rather kobold culture fluff, as their stat gains are on par with that of the traditional humanoid age categories. With that logic, any humanoid that can get the dragon type without being a half-dragon (explicitly called a lesser dragon, despite being half of a true dragon and potentially having age categories to "advance" through) becomes a true dragon, as they advance through age categories and gain powers as they age

yeah, and now tell me how you gonna get the "Age Categories" that only non-lesser-dragons (aka true dragons) and Kobold have?

All creatures can have "Age Effects", not to mistake as "Age Categories" which is something different.

Tell me any other way than DWK that would fit the description?

I repeating this over and over and people still ignore it as I have never mentioned it. That is what is bothers me atm. But hey I haven't lost hope, thx due few people that at least notice/acknowledging my point even if they don't share my point of view.

____________________

While interpreting the "advance" verb as "Advancement" on page Draconomicon causes oddities with the "other true dragon" get Adancement tables like on 3-22 (which btw is just a shortened version of the table 3-21, meaning not as detailed but talks about the same things).

My interpretation causes no oddities (besides from DWK being true dragons..^^) in the rules:

Draconomicon P4:
First declares what qualifies as true dragon:

True dragons are those creatures that become more powerful as they grow older.

That is the sole requirement. Nothing else. Because, ..

Other creatures of the dragon type that do not advance through age categories are referred to as lesser dragons

..is a rule that "disqualifies you as lesser dragon". Taking this to a requirement for true dragons is extrapolated and wrong. The text started already to talk about "other creatures" and not about true dragon requirements anymore. It just tells you what disqualifies as lesser dragon.

If you can "advance thru age categories" you disqualify (as do DWK).

And DWK do gain is power as they age.

All requirement for being a true dragon and not being a lesser dragons are met.

The problem is you. It's the guy that posted above me, it's the guy that posted below me, the moderators & administrators, and sometimes it's even me too. But until you can admit that you are just as bad as you claim others to be and I can tell you from experience that even if you can admit to it it's far to easy to fall down to their level again. It doesn't mean you should forgo trying through.

I agree with you. We all make claims and argue and discuss. And it's not always easy have an objective point of view on the things that really matter. And our own intentions why we take a certain position do matter.
But imho, as long as we all try to be nice and friendly to each other and don't fluke with our intentions it's all fine and OK for me.

My intention is RAW abuse for forum (optimization) fun. For me RAW is a discipline where you ask how you can exploit the RAW, not what the intention (RAI) of the designers was for a balanced game (lol, balanced 3.5..^^).
That's why I made the comprehension with hacking and video-game exploiting. You don't ask what the intentions or the common use is. You just ask what is possible. In our chase the code to exploit are the Rules As Written. That is my definition line between RAW and RAI.

RAI tries to give you a playable ruleset. RAW is just a theoretical area for those who like it the way it is. Not for playing RAW games, we all play "as the DM sees it fit", nothing else.
If anyone thinks I have ill intentions (like abuse these things on real games..), I'm sorry if I somehow let you think that (even if I think I tried to make this point clear several times).

[Troacctid]

My interpretation causes no oddities (besides from DWK being true dragons..^^) in the rules:

Draconomicon P4:
First declares what qualifies as true dragon:

True dragons are those creatures that become more powerful as they grow older.

That is the sole requirement. Nothing else.

"Druids and monks are true dragons" seems like an oddity to me.

[GeminiVeil]

yeah, and now tell me how you gonna get the "Age Categories" that only non-lesser-dragons (aka true dragons) and Kobold have?

All creatures can have "Age Effects", not to mistake as "Age Categories" which is something different.

Tell me any other way than DWK that would fit the description?

Probably the only thing that I am really going to contribute to this thread, but I thought I would since I have mentioned it before in other threads about other things. The aging chart for all the PHB races is at least once referred to as "Age Categories". PHB pg 73, under the disguise skill, mentions using it to look like a different age category. It's part of the table and there is text mentioning it that goes into slightly more detail.

[Mato]

"Druids and monks are true dragons" seems like an oddity to me.

If you want oddities and minor nitpicks you should read page twenty three of races of the dragon. A "Kobolds' power doesn’t originate in their muscles, but from their hereditary magic" and their hereditary magic, the draconic rite of passage stuff, is unaffected by the kobold's age category.

And to get even more technical it's not really the dragon type people focus on, but the idea that the DWK only gains bonuses as he ages and that's why you mentioned druids & monks. But the DKW kobold's aging effects still include penalties to multiple ability scores and a DWK still has them, they are just not applied. Sort of like being proficient in armor doesn't remove your armor's armor check penalty, you just don't apply it to your attack rolls anymore thanks to a feat.

Not that it matters, the kobold's aging effects don't alter their hereditary magic anyway. Rather it's the charisma change alters your save DCs and spell slots. It's a false equivalence, like saying maximized summon monster affects the summon creature's damage rolls or pierce magical protection can knock people out of shapechange because you are incorrectly linking one thing to another.

[umbergod]

Probably the only thing that I am really going to contribute to this thread, but I thought I would since I have mentioned it before in other threads about other things. The aging chart for all the PHB races is at least once referred to as "Age Categories". PHB pg 73, under the disguise skill, mentions using it to look like a different age category. It's part of the table and there is text mentioning it that goes into slightly more detail.

Thank you for addressing exactly what i was going to address. Given that the kobold age categories dont line up with dragon age categories (that also determines dragon hd, la, size and abilities, whereas it just determines age and possible mental stat boosts for a DWK)

[Gruftzwerg]

Probably the only thing that I am really going to contribute to this thread, but I thought I would since I have mentioned it before in other threads about other things. The aging chart for all the PHB races is at least once referred to as "Age Categories". PHB pg 73, under the disguise skill, mentions using it to look like a different age category. It's part of the table and there is text mentioning it that goes into slightly more detail.

"Specific Trumps General" and not "Specific becomes General".

A specific rule for the disguise skill, can't change rules on a global lvl. Only in its specific niche (here the disguise skill).
And if you take it full RAW: The disguise skill could only used by those creatures with "Age Categories" to fake another age category, disqualifying all non true dragons and non kobold.
So, the quoted text does have no power at all to change anything related to this discussion, due to rule hierarchy.
By RAW that doesn't affect that Age Categories and Age Effects are 2 different things.

And Draconomicon disqualifies you as lesser dragon for just having "Age Categories" (doesn't need to be Dragon Age Categories by RAW).

"Druids and monks are true dragons" seems like an oddity to me.

If they can change their type to dragons (remember that we are trying to differentiate dragons into true dragons and lesser dragons) and somehow get Age Categories.
Do I need to point that out (that we talk about dragons) in every post to avoid useless nitpicks??
Your nitpicking doesn't help the discussion at all and is just another provocation due to lack of real arguments. Thx again for being so kind..

[umbergod]

"Specific Trumps General" and not "Specific becomes General".

A specific rule for the disguise skill, can't change rules on a global lvl. Only in its specific niche (here the disguise skill).
And if you take it full RAW: The disguise skill could only used by those creatures with "Age Categories" to fake another age category, disqualifying all non true dragons and non kobold.
So, the quoted text does have no power at all to change anything related to this discussion, due to rule hierarchy.
By RAW that doesn't affect that Age Categories and Age Effects are 2 different things.

And Draconomicon disqualifies you as lesser dragon for just having "Age Categories" (doesn't need to be Dragon Age Categories by RAW).


If they can change their type to dragons (remember that we are trying to differentiate dragons into true dragons and lesser dragons) and somehow get Age Categories.
Do I need to point that out (that we talk about dragons) in every post to avoid useless nitpicks??
Your nitpicking doesn't help the discussion at all and is just another provocation due to lack of real arguments. Thx again for being so kind..

Translation: lalalalalalalalalala i cant hear you bc im shouting my opinions and personal interpretation of RAW and you cant prove me wrong.

Except its been done. Youre wrong, plain and simple. Otherwise, a halfdragon kobold is a true dragon, since text trumps tables and its a table that DQs half dragons as true dragons. Huzzah, ive used your own lack of logic to counter your stance

[Bartmanhomer]

I'm surprised that this thread isn't lock yet.

[Promethean]

I'm surprised that this thread isn't lock yet.

Maybe the gods find us too entertaining to shut down just yet.

[Bartmanhomer]

Maybe the gods find us too entertaining to shut down just yet.

Yes that must be it. I guess this thread will keep going until it's reach the limit.

[umbergod]

Yes that must be it. I guess this thread will keep going until it's reach the limit.

Mods seem crazy lax sometimes, and other times on top of things. Oh well

[Bartmanhomer]

Mods seem crazy lax sometimes, and other times on top of things. Oh well

This thread would make a good movie out of it.

Coming soon in a forum near you: DWK The Endless Arugment. Will this ridiculous argument ever end? Tune in and find out. If you get your tickets you'll get a Dragonwrought Kobold Plush Doll, male or female. Your choice.

[umbergod]

This thread would make a good movie out of it.

Coming soon in a forum near you: DWK The Endless Arugment. Will this ridiculous argument ever end? Tune in and find out. If you get your tickets you'll get a Dragonwrought Kobold Plush Doll, male or female. Your choice.

With the amount lf times the topic is brought up, its more like a terrible tv show that just refuses to stop

[Remuko]

Translation: lalalalalalalalalala i cant hear you bc im shouting my opinions and personal interpretation of RAW and you cant prove me wrong.

Except its been done. Youre wrong, plain and simple. Otherwise, a halfdragon kobold is a true dragon, since text trumps tables and its a table that DQs half dragons as true dragons. Huzzah, ive used your own lack of logic to counter your stance

Why do you seem so worked up about this? He already said he does this just for TO, not for play. He doesnt and wouldnt play like this at the table. He's not enforcing this on anyone to play this way, he's basically just pointing it out as a funny RAW rules things that can (theoretically) be exploited even though almost no DM would ever allow it. So why get so hostile about it? It makes no sense.

@ the bit I bolded: sounds good to me! I'd allow it.

[Doctor Awkward]

Why do you seem so worked up about this? He already said he does this just for TO, not for play. He doesnt and wouldnt play like this at the table. He's not enforcing this on anyone to play this way, he's basically just pointing it out as a funny RAW rules things that can (theoretically) be exploited even though almost no DM would ever allow it. So why get so hostile about it? It makes no sense.

@ the bit I bolded: sounds good to me! I'd allow it.

Amusingly, I pointed out that by his rules half-dragon kobolds also count as true dragons several pages ago and he has been arguing against me on that point ever since.


The main reason this continues is precisely because he thinks that his stance on what Rules As Written means is appropriate for general play. That DM's and players alike are free to interpret anything they read however they want in order to achieve their most favorable result. This is not a useful construct for optimization purposes, since if everyone is playing by their own rules then there is no common ground to hold a discussion on what options are mechanically superior or inferior to others. Because under his logic mechanics don't mean anything other than what you think they should mean.

[umbergod]

Why do you seem so worked up about this? He already said he does this just for TO, not for play. He doesnt and wouldnt play like this at the table. He's not enforcing this on anyone to play this way, he's basically just pointing it out as a funny RAW rules things that can (theoretically) be exploited even though almost no DM would ever allow it. So why get so hostile about it? It makes no sense.

@ the bit I bolded: sounds good to me! I'd allow it.

Not worked up in the least, tho i suppose my fairly aggressive posting could indicate otherwise. His argument is based on cherry picking phrases, omitting several others, and then calling his personal interpretation of specific terms, RAW. Thats not RAW, thats Rules As I Want Them To Be

EDIT: i too would let a halfdragon kobold count as a true dragon, but only via the awful Dragon Disciple prestige, bc im a sadist

[Troacctid]

If they can change their type to dragons (remember that we are trying to differentiate dragons into true dragons and lesser dragons) and somehow get Age Categories.
Do I need to point that out (that we talk about dragons) in every post to avoid useless nitpicks??
Your nitpicking doesn't help the discussion at all and is just another provocation due to lack of real arguments. Thx again for being so kind..

You literally just posted that the dragon type isn't a requirement. I quoted you saying it.

[DarkSoul]

So, in the interest of science, how about everyone steps away from the "yes it is/no it isn't" argument and brainstorms a little in the spirit of the OP?

The question is: How bad would it REALLY be if a dragonwrought kobold was a true dragon?

How about posting up 20-level builds, as detailed as you want, illustrating how you break the game in different ways with a true dragon DWK. I'm honestly a little curious what's the worst that could happen. 3.5+Dragon Magazine allowed, no homebrew of any kind.

[atemu1234]

So, in the interest of science, how about everyone steps away from the "yes it is/no it isn't" argument and brainstorms a little in the spirit of the OP?

The question is: How bad would it REALLY be if a dragonwrought kobold was a true dragon?

How about posting up 20-level builds, as detailed as you want, illustrating how you break the game in different ways with a true dragon DWK. I'm honestly a little curious what's the worst that could happen. 3.5+Dragon Magazine allowed, no homebrew of any kind.

It's kind of simple what happens; you play a DWK Spellhoarding Sorcerer 10/Incantatrix with Draconic Rites, giving it a caster level of 21 at twenty. You fill all of its feat slots with the most broken of epic feats, which older dragons qualify for.

[Doctor Awkward]

It's kind of simple what happens; you play a DWK Spellhoarding Sorcerer 10/Incantatrix with Draconic Rites, giving it a caster level of 21 at twenty. You fill all of its feat slots with the most broken of epic feats, which older dragons qualify for.

Or you play a Dragonwrought Kobold Sorcerer 1, set your starting age as venerable, and for your two flaws take Epic Toughness twice for a bonus 60 hp.

[DarkSoul]

It's kind of simple what happens; you play a DWK Spellhoarding Sorcerer 10/Incantatrix with Draconic Rites, giving it a caster level of 21 at twenty. You fill all of its feat slots with the most broken of epic feats, which older dragons qualify for.

Old+ dragons only get around the 21 character level requirement; they still have to meet the other prerequisites. So what are the "most broken" of epic feats you're thinking of for this sorcerer?

[Mato]

Why do you seem so worked up about this? He already said he does this just for TO, not for play.

Because in a debate that is called an appeal and what that means is he is trying to say it's fine to say they are true dragons over in this other area even if he cannot prove it else where. If it is accepted then as long as he claims he is over there then he can also submit he is irrevocably right and cannot be rebuked. It is also a foot in the door tactic that allows him to misinform anyone genuinely asking about the subject after meeting thousands of pages of people arguing. This simply results in a continuation of pointless debates and circle jerks and it all keys back in the community accepting things like this.

Besides that, "TO" doesn't mean you ignore rule entries or write homebrew. It's called theoretical because what you are supposed to be doing is manipulating probability. Like the Abomination Template has a 0.25% chance of giving you two levels of spellcasting, by slitting your character's throat to generate a new character you can and will eventually achieve that outcome. Same with stuff like contact other plane to learn things or using shapechange to access every special ability to channel into manipulate form. None of this requires any inaccurate concepts, illogical assumptions, and blatantly wrong readings to work. It's just improbable that you can achieve the desired result for some reason or another.

But when people submit cow dung and are immediately proven wrong, they don't admit it and instead try to seek a reason to claim they are right. And they got there by not understanding things and ruining them so it's not surprise that the term "TO" was corrupted and hasn't meant what it says it has for decades. So that "another" is taken to mean the rules, DMs, people on the forums, and anything else that disagrees. In other words, it's used as theoretically you can be right as long as you ignore anything that disagrees with you. See the first paragraph for some examples with the problems of accepting excuses for bad behavior as a way to argue that you are right on a subject.

[Doctor Despair]

Of note, again, is that all dragons, not just true dragons, that are old qualify to take epic feats before the 21st level. Almost certainly not intended that way, as per a side-note that says the passages are usually referring to true dragons, but written that way none the less. If I remember correctly, being a true dragon only lets you take the various architypes, right? Or are those also worded very laxly to permit all dragons? I don't have my copy of the text handy

[Doctor Awkward]

Of note, again, is that all dragons, not just true dragons, that are old qualify to take epic feats before the 21st level. Almost certainly not intended that way, as per a side-note that says the passages are usually referring to true dragons, but written that way none the less. If I remember correctly, being a true dragon only lets you take the various architypes, right? Or are those also worded very laxly to permit all dragons? I don't have my copy of the text handy

The text of the Draconomicon specifically says that it "mostly concerns itself with true dragons". Therefore the various parts of the book do not always explicitly say "true" dragons even though they are almost always referring to true dragons for the sake of brevity. That sidebar tells you the general intended meaning of the text.

When a rule appears that also applies to lesser dragons, it will say so, such as the Armor Class entry on page 100 under the "Advanced Dragons" heading:

An advanced dragon’s natural armor bonus
increases by +1 for every Hit Die it gains beyond the great
wyrm stage. (You can use this rule for lesser dragon advancement
as well, since natural armor and Hit Dice always
increase at the same rate.)

Note how they don't bother to say "advanced true dragons natural armor bonus", even though the rule in question specifically pertains to them, with an additional note that it also applies to lesser dragons.

That follows for the entire rest of the book.

[Mato]

Of note, again, is that all dragons, not just true dragons, that are old qualify to take epic feats before the 21st level.

It doesn't actually say that through. What you're quoting is a third party description of what they think it should do.

Here is what the part people keep quoting.

Dragons of at least old age also can choose these feats even if they have no class levels.

Even if you take it wrong (it merely highlights all canonical true dragons are epic characters when they reach old age) I technically have always been able to choose to take any feat I want, it doesn't mean I get it through.

It's similar to a bonus feat argument.

Feat: A rogue may gain a bonus feat in place of a special ability.

Can the rogue select power attack if they have strength 8? The rules never confirm they can and a player must put his actions into game terms and a person debating on a forum must provide proof, so the answer is no. The Draconomicon's entry does not bypass to any requirements a epic feat may have and it doesn't read off like an exception no matter how hard you try so the most specific rule on the matter is the feat's requirements, such as needing 9th level spells for epic spellcasting which prevents several old+ dragons from obtaining the feat anyway.

But we can still play devil's advocate here and pretend (that is to imagine a false reality) it did work. But remember, it only mentions selecting so you should read up on how feats work.

Some feats have prerequisites. Your character must have the indicated ability score, class feature, feat, skill, base attack bonus, or other quality designated in order to select or use that feat. A character can gain a feat at the same level at which he or she gains the prerequisite.
A character can’t use a feat if he or she has lost a prerequisite.

Because a creature can be in a position where they have selected, and obtained, a feat but are still unable to use it.

So they assumed text to be there that is not and then assigned it a level of priority it shouldn't have while overlooking how feats work. Then they argued it and refused to admit they were wrong so you have misinformed on the subject. Your perception is just another example of what I discussed before. Now I wonder, will you follow the probable outcome as well?