Dragonwrought kobold

[Gruftzwerg]

1:

Draconomicon, pg. 144; Lesser Dragon Characters:

That was not what you where talking about and I asked for.

Nowhere.

A dragon is a true dragon if it is explicitly called as such in the rules.
If it is not called as such, then per those same rules it is automatically a lesser dragon.

All other similarities are irrelevant.

Would you be so kind to point me to where that rule is? That they have to be called out as such (TD) explicitly?

Do you remember now? You wanted to point me where it states that true dragons need to be called out as such. That was your statement.

2:

Dragonwrought kobolds have both a set level adjustment and no built-in progression due to age.

As said several times, when we can confirm that a DWK is a true dragon, than the DM needs to make tables for DWK Advancement since the "other true dragon" paragraph (on p144 Draconomicon) enforces him to do.
And since DWK are dragons who "advance" thru "age categories", they disqualify as lesser dragon, which leaves only True Dragons as possibility. Note that it's not Advancement what they are asking for, cause the same book gives it for all true dragons for free. So it can't help you to decide whether or not a dragon is true, when true dragons get it for free...

edit:

I just looked at those other sovereign archetypes. They are awesome.

Why haven't we been talking about passionflame dragonwrought kobold master spellthief precocious apprentices/rage mages? Why haven't we been talking about wyrm of war dragonwrought tigerclaw sorcerers/bloodclaw masters with the draconic claw feat?

Someone should start a dragonwrought sovereign archtype optimization thread...

Because every time any kind of DWK true dragon optimization comes up, it ends somewhat like this thread here. And normally at this time of the thread (9days old IIRC) we would have more than 40 pages of rule-wars..^^

[Doctor Awkward]

As said several times, when we can confirm that a DWK is a true dragon, than the DM needs to make tables for DWK Advancement since the "other true dragon" paragraph (on p144 Draconomicon) enforces him to do.

When the DM has to create rules for something that is not explicitly printed already, that is the dictionary definition of "house-ruling".

Therefore dragonwrought kobold, by RAW, are not true dragons.

[Gruftzwerg]

When the DM has to create rules for something that is not explicitly printed already, that is the dictionary definition of "house-ruling".

Therefore dragonwrought kobold, by RAW, are not true dragons.

sry but no, Draconomicon p144 "other true dragons" give you instruction how to create those.
Homebrew is created due to DM/player desires. But here we have a clear instruction given to the DM and enforcing him (unless he houserules, which he can. but than it is a houserule and not RAW).

For true dragons other than those found in the Monster Manual, construct tables such as those above using the information on Table 3–22: Additional Level Adjustments.

So, there is no need to homebrew, you got instructions to follow. The DM needs to make a table as in 3-22. The values for the DWK doesn't need to fit to any other dragon. The DM is only enforced to use the same table as base, not the values presented for other true dragons.
>>> The DM may choose if a DWK just gets LA+0 and no additional abilities/bonuses related to it or if he loads up the DWK with LA+(X) and some bonuses added to those categories (e.g. the base dragon kind the DWK chooses on his feat could be an option for the DM.)
The first option (LA+0) would enable regular DWK True Dragon cheese as most optimizers would prefer it.
The second option (LA+X) would make most DWK true dragon builds unusable and even worse than starting with a regular true dragon, since the DWK wasted a feat compared to a regular true dragon.

IMHO DWK are true dragons. But if they are optimizer friendly is fully in the hands of the DM. The DM has the freedom how he prefers DWK, with LA+0 or with a bigger handicap.

edit: about RAW & Optimization
Optimizing with RAW is like hacking a program. You don't care about the intention of the programmer or what it is supposed to do.
You look how it interacts with the hardware and look for any kind of loophole in the code and try to exploit it as much as you can.
In terms of D&D this means, you read the rules as written and look for any kind of abuse potential only caring for how the rules interact with each other. You ignore designer intentions and just care about what you can achieve by abusing the rules in non-intended ways.

There is a reason why we differentiate between RAI & RAW.

Maybe we should all make a separate thread about the intentions to cover also the RAI part of DWK. We had a few arguments in one of the older threads about it, some even claiming that the RAI just has changed over the time/books. Other did point out that WotC just tried to buff True Dragons with later released material which did cause that DWK true dragons did get more power than originally intended.
Imho separate RAW and RAI discussions simultaneously would be the best solution to clear the situation.

[daremetoidareyo]

sry but no, Draconomicon p144 "other true dragons" give you instruction how to create those.
Homebrew is created due to DM/player desires. But here we have a clear instruction given to the DM and enforcing him (unless he houserules, which he can. but than it is a houserule and not RAW).



So, there is no need to homebrew, you got instructions to follow. The DM needs to make a table as in 3-22. The values for the DWK doesn't need to fit to any other dragon. The DM is only enforced to use the same table as base, not the values presented for other true dragons.
>>> The DM may choose if a DWK just gets LA+0 and no additional abilities/bonuses related to it or if he loads up the DWK with LA+(X) and some bonuses added to those categories (e.g. the base dragon kind the DWK chooses on his feat could be an option for the DM.)
The first option (LA+0) would enable regular DWK True Dragon cheese as most optimizers would prefer it.
The second option (LA+X) would make most DWK true dragon builds unusable and even worse than starting with a regular true dragon, since the DWK wasted a feat compared to a regular true dragon.

IMHO DWK are true dragons. But if they are optimizer friendly is fully in the hands of the DM. The DM has the freedom how he prefers DWK, with LA+0 or with a bigger handicap.

edit: about RAW & Optimization
Optimizing with RAW is like hacking a program. You don't care about the intention of the programmer or what it is supposed to do.
You look how it interacts with the hardware and look for any kind of loophole in the code and try to exploit it as much as you can.
In terms of D&D this means, you read the rules as written and look for any kind of abuse potential only caring for the rules interact with each other. You ignore designer intentions and just care about what you can achieve by abusing the rules in non-intended ways.

There is a reason why we differentiate between RAI & RAW.

Maybe we should all make a separate thread about the intentions to cover also the RAI part of DWK. We had a few arguments in one of the older threads about it, some even claiming that the RAI just has changed over the time/books. Other did point out that WotC just tried to buff True Dragons with later released material which did cause that DWK true dragons did get more power than originally intended.
Imho separate RAW and RAI discussions simultaneously would be the best solution to clear the situation.

Ahhh. But a changeling half-elf paragon with racial emulation and dragonwrought feats has no LA...

[Gruftzwerg]

Ahhh. But a changeling half-elf paragon with racial emulation and dragonwrought feats has no LA...

..and doesn't work, since the changeling doesn't have/gain access to "Age Categories" which would turn him only into a lesser dragon. Sorry..^^

[umbergod]

Still waiting for a Pro-True Dragon person to give any examples on how a dragonwrought kobold gains new powers and abilities strictly from age progression.....

[Gruftzwerg]

Still waiting for a Pro-True Dragon person to give any examples on how a dragonwrought kobold gains new powers and abilities strictly from age progression.....

Ability scores count as Natural Abilities IIRC. Gaining pure mental stats due to age accounts as pure power gain and as ability gain. While you don't get it on every age category, it still qualifies, since there is no mention that you need to gain them for every age category progression.
There you go, and btw.. If I am not mistaken I am repeating this argument already over and over. So, how comes that you missed it?^^

[daremetoidareyo]

..and doesn't work, since the changeling doesn't have/gain access to "Age Categories" which would turn him only into a lesser dragon. Sorry..^^

But if you emulate a kobold you are considered a member of that race for all other purposes. So if in your campaign Dragonrot kobolds are true dragons, your changeling is a true dragon

[Scots Dragon]

Ability scores count as Natural Abilities IIRC. Gaining pure mental stats due to age accounts as pure power gain and as ability gain. While you don't get it on every age category, it still qualifies, since there is no mention that you need to gain them for every age category progression.
There you go, and btw.. If I am not mistaken I am repeating this argument already over and over. So, how comes that you missed it?^^

Except, they don't gain those bonuses with age categories because they correspond to humanoid ageing effects. They also do not correspond to the age categories in question; while the bonuses for middle age and venerable respectively represent entering the 'very old' and 'great wyrm' age categories, the old bonus comes half-way through the 'ancient' age category. And it's also worth noting that these bonuses are half-bonuses of +1 where all true dragons have bonuses of +2 or more per age category.

It's also notable that actual true dragons are not subject to these ageing effects at all, but instead only gain the ability adjustments in line with age categories.


They also do not grow in size as they age past maturity; all true dragons do so.

They also do not gain hit dice as they age; all true dragons do so, with 3 HD per age category for most true dragons, and 5 HD per age category for epic dragons.

They also do not gain any additional abilities like breath weapons or wings without taking feats or templates to represent them.

Another fact of the matter is that dragonwrought kobolds are not their own isolated dragon type. Instead they rely on a bloodline from a pre-existing dragon type, specifically either of a chromatic or metallic dragon. This makes them into something more equivalent to half-dragons or dragon disciples than it does anything resembling a true dragon.

[Doctor Awkward]

Ability scores count as Natural Abilities IIRC. Gaining pure mental stats due to age accounts as pure power gain and as ability gain. While you don't get it on every age category, it still qualifies, since there is no mention that you need to gain them for every age category progression.
There you go, and btw.. If I am not mistaken I am repeating this argument already over and over. So, how comes that you missed it?^^

By this logic, every single dragon type creature qualifies as a true dragon, since gaining inherent bonuses to ability scores due to increase hit dice is a basic function of progression.

This includes wyverns, dragon turtles, Abyssal Drakes, and every other creature explicitly called out as a lesser dragon in the Draconomicon.

How do you justify this contradiction?

[daremetoidareyo]

if you're a wyrmling true dragon and you age to the next age category, but you are hit by Permenant level drain at every age category, do you lose true dragon status?

How important is the interpretation of the word "advancement" in light of this? Does a failure to advance while true dragon negate true dragon status?

[Gruftzwerg]

But if you emulate a kobold you are considered a member of that race for all other purposes. So if in your campaign Dragonrot kobolds are true dragons, your changeling is a true dragon

you count as member of that race for all "effects" realted to it. Having "Age Categories" ain't an "effect". It's a trait which you explicitly don't gain as Racial Emulation states.

By this logic, every single dragon type creature qualifies as a true dragon, since gaining inherent bonuses to ability scores due to increase hit dice is a basic function of progression.

This includes wyverns, dragon turtles, Abyssal Drakes, and every other creature explicitly called out as a lesser dragon in the Draconomicon.

How do you justify this contradiction?

No, "wyverns, dragon turtles, Abyssal Drakes, and every other creature explicitly called out as a lesser dragon in the Draconomicon" don't have "Age Categories" which puts them by default into the lesser dragon category, while DWK do have "Age Categories" and thus disqualify as lesser dragons.
Only "regular" true dragons and Kobolds have "Age Categories". But just Kobold lacks the dragon type & the pure gains which the DWK feat gives you.

[daremetoidareyo]

you count as member of that race for all "effects" realted to it. Having "Age Categories" ain't an "effect". It's a trait which you explicitly don't gain as Racial Emulation states.



No, "wyverns, dragon turtles, Abyssal Drakes, and every other creature explicitly called out as a lesser dragon in the Draconomicon" don't have "Age Categories" which puts them by default into the lesser dragon category, while DWK do have "Age Categories" and thus disqualify as lesser dragons.
Only "regular" true dragons and Kobolds have "Age Categories". But just Kobold lacks the dragon type & the pure gains which the DWK feat gives you.

A changeling doesn't need the age categories, if a dragonwrought kobold is a true dragon, you get that as a changeling.

[Promethean]

By this logic, every single dragon type creature qualifies as a true dragon, since gaining inherent bonuses to ability scores due to increase hit dice is a basic function of progression.

This includes wyverns, dragon turtles, Abyssal Drakes, and every other creature explicitly called out as a lesser dragon in the Draconomicon.

How do you justify this contradiction?

Not really, the explicitly stated lesser dragons still wouldn't have the 12 age categories kobolds do. So the statement isn't contradictory.

if you're a wyrmling true dragon and you age to the next age category, but you are hit by Permenant level drain at every age category, do you lose true dragon status?

How important is the interpretation of the word "advancement" in light of this? Does a failure to advance while true dragon negate true dragon status?

Said true dragon would still be a true dragon, would still grow in size categories, gain ability scores/nat armor/etc., gain natural spell-casting, and be pretty overpowered as it'd allow the pc access to all the true dragon options as a +1-6 race(which with LA buy off as described in the SRD: LA Buyoff Isn't nearly as bad.)

[Gruftzwerg]

A changeling doesn't need the age categories, if a dragonwrought kobold is a true dragon, you get that as a changeling.

Counting as DWK only gives you the "dragon" status and only if you have "Age Categories" you may call yourself a true dragon (see Draconomicon P4).

Other creatures of the dragon type that do not advance
through age categories are referred to as lesser dragons (which should not be taken to mean that they are necessarily less formidable than true dragons).

Further they lack the pure power gain as they grow older:

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

Btw, notice that the power gain is not tied to the Age Categories and thus the pure beneficial "Age Effects" a DWK gets are enough to qualify.
A changeling might copy the pure beneficial "Age Effects" by some other mean (to ignore the physical "Age Effect" penalties: e.g. 17th lvl monk with Timeless Body), but he would still lack the "Age Categories".

Dunno if there exists any other kind or "Age Categories" in 3.5 than those of regular true dragons and kobold. But if there is any you could get for your Changeling, it would work. But without all of that, you would get a strict "no".

[Scots Dragon]

Not really, the explicitly stated lesser dragons still wouldn't have the 12 age categories kobolds do. So the statement isn't contradictory.

Actually they might have the same twelve age categories, we don't know either way. The actual wording doesn't forbid it.

Other creatures of the dragon type that do not advance through age categories are referred to as lesser dragons (which should not be taken to mean that they are necessarily less formidable than true dragons).

It would be entirely possible for basically any creature of the dragon type to possess those twelve age categories. It would be the advancement associated with those age categories that determine whether or not they're true dragons.

Also, if you're willing to expand to another edition, several of the listed lesser dragons explicitly do have those age categories because they were listed as true dragons in the previous edition. Specifically the various types of linnorm, which were true dragons in AD&D 2e but revised down into being lesser dragons in D&D 3e. If we accept that the lore is still the same, however, they would actually still have those age categories.

[umbergod]

Im just curious as to the logic of 1 race specific feat = true dragon, but a +3 LA template doesnt, despite making you literally half true dragon? Inquiring minds want to know

[Nifft]

Im just curious as to the logic of 1 race specific feat = true dragon, but a +3 LA template doesnt, despite making you literally half true dragon? Inquiring minds want to know

Same logic which allows a White Half-Dragon Red Dragon.

That is to say: it's not really any logic.

It's just how the rules are.

[ayvango]

Im just curious as to the logic of 1 race specific feat = true dragon, but a +3 LA template doesnt

It means that kobold as starting point is closer to the destination than any other generic race.

[Doctor Awkward]

Im just curious as to the logic of 1 race specific feat = true dragon, but a +3 LA template doesnt, despite making you literally half true dragon? Inquiring minds want to know

I was actually going to say the same thing once I got home.

Kobolds with the half-dragon template would count as true dragons under Gruft's rules. They are of the dragon type and advance through age categories. Kobolds that have 10 levels in Dragon Disciple would also be true dragons.

Assuming "Age Categories" is not explicitly defined as "12 age categories", then any playable race with explicitly written vital statistics and the half-dragon template would count as a true dragon.


Additionally:

sry but no, Draconomicon p144 "other true dragons" give you instruction how to create those.
Homebrew is created due to DM/player desires. But here we have a clear instruction given to the DM and enforcing him (unless he houserules, which he can. but than it is a houserule and not RAW).

Originally Posted by Draconomicon p144 - Other True Dragons
For true dragons other than those found in the Monster Manual, construct tables such as those above using the information on Table 3–22: Additional Level Adjustments.

So, there is no need to homebrew, you got instructions to follow. The DM needs to make a table as in 3-22.

That's not what the instructions are telling you at to do. At all.
It is instructing you to build tables just like those found in the previous section, using the values in Table 3-22 for the "other true dragon which are not found in the Monster Manual."

The entire rest of the section are instructions on how to interpret Table 3-22. The first sentence of the next paragraph after the table informs you that the Hit Dice and Level Adjustmens listed are for the wyrmling, very young, young, and juvenile age categories for the specific type of dragon they are listed after. It then notes as an example that a sapphire dragon has identical progression to a copper dragon. It then lists additional rules specific to lung dragons and what happens to them as they age.

The instructions are specific to the species listed in Table 3-22. They are not a blanket invitation to just make things up for anything you think should be a true dragon.

Next time read the entirety of the rules you quote to make sure they specifically back up your claim, rather than saying nothing whatsoever to support your claim.

IMHO DWK are true dragons.

You are certainly entitled to your incorrect opinions.
And free to run your own games however you see fit.

edit: about RAW & Optimization
Optimizing with RAW is like hacking a program. You don't care about the intention of the programmer or what it is supposed to do.

Bull****.
Vicious brazen mendacity.

If you go into a casino and get caught attempt to manipulate the rules to your advantage and achieve an unintended consequence, your best case scenario is to get banned from the establishment for life. Most D&D tables work exactly the same way.

You should always exercise sensible caution when encountering vague or unclear text. But it is another thing entirely to willfully ignore context and obvious intent, invent new interpretations for words, or assume that they mean something other than what they clearly mean because it would serve to prove or disprove your point. That isn't optimizing. It's rules-lawyering.

It's also terrible advice to give to new players, and promotes a line of thinking that has zero practical use at the vast majority of gaming tables.

Take this into the Homebrew forum if you want to experiment with builds that don't follow the rules.

There is a reason why we differentiate between RAI & RAW.

Maybe we should all make a separate thread about the intentions to cover also the RAI part of DWK. We had a few arguments in one of the older threads about it, some even claiming that the RAI just has changed over the time/books. Other did point out that WotC just tried to buff True Dragons with later released material which did cause that DWK true dragons did get more power than originally intended.
Imho separate RAW and RAI discussions simultaneously would be the best solution to clear the situation.

Except you aren't arguing RAW. You are, and always have been, arguing the Rules As I Interpret Them And You Can't Prove I'm Wrong, So There!

[Gruftzwerg]

I was actually going to say the same thing once I got home.

Kobolds with the half-dragon template would count as true dragons under Gruft's rules. They are of the dragon type and advance through age categories. Kobolds that have 10 levels in Dragon Disciple would also be true dragons.

Assuming "Age Categories" is not explicitly defined as "12 age categories", then any playable race with explicitly written vital statistics and the half-dragon template would count as a true dragon.

We have a specific rule for Half-Dragon that trumps the general definition of True Dragons. The rule puts a Half-Dragon automatically into the lesser dragon camp without any further debate.
The oddity is that this rule puts "a White Half-Dragon Red Dragon" into the lesser Dragon camp too by RAW.

Additionally:



That's not what the instructions are telling you at to do. At all.
It is instructing you to build tables just like those found in the previous section, using the values in Table 3-22 for the "other true dragon which are not found in the Monster Manual."

The entire rest of the section are instructions on how to interpret Table 3-22. The first sentence of the next paragraph after the table informs you that the Hit Dice and Level Adjustmens listed are for the wyrmling, very young, young, and juvenile age categories for the specific type of dragon they are listed after. It then notes as an example that a sapphire dragon has identical progression to a copper dragon. It then lists additional rules specific to lung dragons and what happens to them as they age.

The instructions are specific to the species listed in Table 3-22. They are not a blanket invitation to just make things up for anything you think should be a true dragon.

It's up to the DM how he sees it. The rule text only demands that the creature needs a table such as 3-22. This means there needs to be the same columns (names) but you don't need to copy any of the represented values of the other dragons. The DM could:
a) go with LA+0 for a optimizer friendly DWK
b) add LA+(X) as a penalty for a certain age (e.g. vernegeable to handicap the DWK true dragon cheese as he sees it fit.
c) add the same or more LA as for another true dragon (e.g. the one tied to the DWK feat) and thus ruining any DWK true dragon optimization attempt by just making it not worth anymore (since a DWK than wastes a feat compared to directly playing the true dragon tied to its feat).

That isn't optimizing. It's rules-lawyering.

It's also terrible advice to give to new players, and promotes a line of thinking that has zero practical use at the vast majority of gaming tables.

Take this into the Homebrew forum if you want to experiment with builds that don't follow the rules.




Except you aren't arguing RAW. You are, and always have been, arguing the Rules As I Interpret Them And You Can't Prove I'm Wrong, So There!

Nobody said that this is "practical optimization" for every table. We/I talk about a theoretical RAW optimization. Which optimization lvl a group/DM is prefering is sole up to them and not for the forum to decide.
Further nobody enforces you to play with it (or talk about RAW either since you always bring someones intentions into your arguments and demand that your opinion ain't RAI but RAW..). Do you play with "healing by drowning"? Do your players always abuse it every session? I guess not. So, you as almost everybody who plays a somewhat sane table doesn't play RAW (including myself here btw..). IMHO nobody plays full RAW cause its only fun for a single session or two until the people get bored of people pulling out one oddity after the other.

Same with DWK and their true dragon status. Nobody forces you to play RAW.

And yeah, this is rule-lawyering <3, finally you got what RAW optimization means. You try to abuse rules as the text present em. No sane intentions of the designers or someone else (like a real DM) will stop you for this theoretical discipline, cause you just care for the text of rules and nothing else. For "Theoretical RAW Optimization" you assume a DM that plays full RAW (which don't exist in real game sessions). It's just a theoretical discipline for theorycrafters like me who have fun with it. Or for those rare high OP and TO sessions you maybe play once in a while, but that's it.

But this doesn't mean that a RAW optimizer plays RAW at full strength. As said, nobody plays RAW on a regular base.

We all play RAI imho. Most people who claim that they play RAW either don't know the difference or use the term to imply a high and mostly free optimization lvl. But even they won't rely on "healing by drowning", for more than a single session imho..^^
And I bet nobody would try to attempt to play something like Pun-Pun or BoBaFeat, even if they are full legal by RAW.

People need to understand the difference between RAW and RAI and that nobody really plays full RAW.

_____

And regarding the impression on newbies to 3.5/the forum. Sorry but imho the very first thing a newbie in the forum needs to know is, how they can use the forum for their needs. Most often they request "the build with max optimization and *PEW PEW*". And guess what, 3.5 can make that possible. Only that the DM and the other teammates with suffer..
But how you want to approach this problem?
By denying "theoretical RAW discussion" (who are fun for some people imho, think of : healing by drowning, pun pun..)?
Or do you want to prevent newbies from knowing how unbalanced 3.5 build are (and sometimes dysfunctional as seen in our beloved dysfunctional rule series here in the forum)?
Imho it's something almost every newbie in the forum needs to experience himself, so that next time he will provide better optimization lvl info for his requests..^^

[Troacctid]

{Scrubbed}

[Promethean]

{scrubbed}

Which one? This is the internet, you'll have too be more specific on which radical baseless argument you're referring too.

[AnonCastillo]

>DWK Loredrakes
>Loredrake requires a true dragon to reduce its racial hit dice from d12 to d10
>DWK don't have racial hit dice

Imagine believing that a DWK can be a Loredrake.

[ayvango]

>DWK Loredrakes
>Loredrake requires a true dragon to reduce its racial hit dice from d12 to d10
>DWK don't have racial hit dice

Imagine believing that a DWK can be a Loredrake.

That is all theoretical optimization.

When turning to practise any sane group would add little house rule loredrake, xorvintall and other cheese so it could not be taken by a kobold character despite being true dragon. Just like any group patches infinite wish loop and energy transformation field.

[Gruftzwerg]

{scrubbed}

Welcome back. And seems you haven't changed either. Discrediting others while making no statement/argument about the topic at all. But hey, I'm still happy to see you here. Was already missing you and asked myself where you are..^^
Do you feel like joining the discussion with some arguments? =)
We are only at page 6 after 10days. We need more people in this topic ;)

>DWK Loredrakes
>Loredrake requires a true dragon to reduce its racial hit dice from d12 to d10
>DWK don't have racial hit dice


Imagine believing that a DWK can be a Loredrake.

Simple to solve if you follow base RAW 3.5 logic:

The D12 Racial Hit Dice ain't a requirement. The requirement is to be a true dragon and nothing else.

The change from D12 >D10 RHD is part of the effect of Loredrake. It's just nonfunctional since it can't target any of the Kobolds RHD. Like when you cast an area spell, the magical-effect tries to affect everything in the area, even illegal targets. It doesn't become totally nonfunctional just because there is one invalid target in it. All legal targets get still affected. And the same chase is here. The RHD reduction just becomes a nonfunctional part for a DWK loredrake.
But the rest of the Loredrake effects still apply.

Now I try to imagine a DWK loredrake..
And...? Should something happen? Should I think how totally OP it is to be 1lvl in-front of wizard casting at the cost of 1 general and 4 metamagic/item creation feats (DWK loredrake vs. wizard over the course of 20lvls)?

Sure getting spells 1 lvl ahead of wizard is nice, but at the theoretical cost of up to 5 feats compared to a wizard ain't that OP imho.

Sure for some tables when your other party members don't optimize as much as your DWK, it's a bad thing. But when you are in a group of a Planar Shepherd, Codzilla and such builds, would it overshadow the others?

While most of us play on a more sane lvl (me including), we see posts of other people that try to play those TO builds that are totally OP. So do you really have a problem with imagining a loredrake DWK (maybe not at your table but on other tables with high optimization)? (I'm curious)

That is all theoretical optimization.

When turning to practise any sane group would add little house rule loredrake, xorvintall and other cheese so it could not be taken by a kobold character despite being true dragon. Just like any group patches infinite wish loop and energy transformation field.

I agree. Imho some people seem to have problems to realize that they aren't playing RAW at all and that it's a normal thing to houserule such things like "healing by drowning" or a "true dragon DWK" away.

Nobody is suggesting that all tables should work with RAW DWK ruling.

[ayvango]

things like "healing by drowning"

Had anyone already suggested aquarian frenzied berserker build?

[Gruftzwerg]

Had anyone already suggested aquarian frenzied berserker build?

No, I guess because the aquarian wouldn't drown in regular water and thus it would be a poor choice..^^

[ayvango]

I mean someone who carry aquarium in place of normal helm. Other way it be amphibian who can willingly turn off/on his breathing.

[Troacctid]

Welcome back. And seems you haven't changed either. Discrediting others while making no statement/argument about the topic at all. But hey, I'm still happy to see you here. Was already missing you and asked myself where you are..^^
Do you feel like joining the discussion with some arguments? =)
We are only at page 6 after 10days. We need more people in this topic ;)

You seemed content to jump in without any new arguments to offer. What's wrong with my doing the same? You've already handwaved away all the evidence against your position.

I agree. Imho some people seem to have problems to realize that they aren't playing RAW at all and that it's a normal thing to houserule such things like "healing by drowning" or a "true dragon DWK" away.

Nobody is suggesting that all tables should work with RAW DWK ruling.

I'll suggest it. Tables should work with the RAW DWK ruling, which is that they are lesser dragons.